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:
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:
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.

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.
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.
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.
Related articles
- Stockholm heat toll ‘doubled in 30 years’ (climatenewsnetwork.net)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.




Hi again Anthony,
Winter Mortality is greater than Summer Mortality across Europe (and elsewhere).
I suggest the Umea University study is entirely incorrect because the number of reduced deaths due to warmer winters in Northern Europe will outnumber the number of deaths due to cooler summers.
This reality is reflected in positive numbers for Relative Excess Winter Mortality (“Winter Mortality” also described as Coefficient of Seasonal Variation in Mortality or CSVM), which measures the increased incidence (in the Northern Hemisphere) of mortality from December to March inclusive versus the rest of the year.
Winter Mortality in Sweden is about +0.10 or ~10%, similar to Norway, Finland, Germany, Netherlands etc., and these are comparatively low numbers.
Much higher Winter Mortality occurs in the UK, Ireland, Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain. This may seem to be counter-intuitive because these countries area warmer.
However, I suggest that countries that adapt well to winter have lower Winter Mortality Rates that countries that do not.
I further suggest that as the climate cools, which I think it will in the near future, we can expect to see increased suffering and death in Europe and elsewhere, in part because many countries have severely damaged their energy systems due to the foolish adoption of wind and solar power schemes that are both costly and ineffective.
This bleak probability reflects, in my opinion, an egregious error in government climate and energy policy that will cost many lives.
The environmental movement, which has promoted this “green energy” debacle, should be held primarily responsible for this unfolding tragedy.
Hope I am wrong.
Regards, Allan
*******************
Background Information:
Winter Mortality (December to March inclusive) is greater than Summer Mortality across Europe (and elsewhere).
See Figure 3 of the following paper. Relative Excess Winter Mortality in Sweden is about 0.10 or ~10%.
Winter Excess Mortality: A Comparison
between Norway and England plus Wales
http://ageing.oxfordjournals.org/content/25/5/343.full.pdf
See Figure 3 – Relative Excess Winter Mortality in Sweden is about 0.10 or ~10%.
“Bivariate analyses showed that the excess winter mortality (December-March) in England and Wales was nearly twice as high in old as in middle-aged people, and also markedly higher than in Norway, while the association between excess winter deaths and influenza was of a similar magnitude.”
Some of this reality is related to the following observation:
“Using data from 20 Western European countries, a highly significant positive correlation (R = 0.71, p < 0.001) was found between total mortality rates for the elderly (65 years and over) and relative excess winter mortality.”
Excess winter mortality in Europe: a cross country analysis identifying key risk factors
http://jech.bmj.com/content/57/10/784.full
This study does not include Sweden.
Table 1 – Coefficient of seasonal variation in mortality (CSVM) in EU-14 (mean, 1988–97)
CSVM 95% CI
Austria 0.14 (0.12 to 0.16)
Belgium 0.13 (0.09 to 0.17)
Denmark 0.12 (0.10 to 0.14)
Finland 0.10 (0.07 to 0.13)
France 0.13 (0.11 to 0.15)
Germany 0.11 (0.09 to 0.13)
Greece 0.18 (0.15 to 0.21)
Ireland 0.21 (0.18 to 0.24)
Italy 0.16 (0.14 to 0.18)
Luxembourg 0.12 (0.08 to 0.16)
Netherlands 0.11 (0.09 to 0.13)
Portugal 0.28 (0.25 to 0.31)
Spain 0.21 (0.19 to 0.23)
UK 0.18 (0.16 to 0.20)
Mean 0.16 (0.14 to 0.18)
******************
LOL, thanks! Actually I like the word ‘right’ better. Can you ‘right’ this paper? 🙂
Well, Jimbo, lol, gotta admire your persevering, “I am a rock, I am an island,” self-reliance. Kind of a bummer for T.J. (yesterday at 3:28pm), though. Sigh.
**********
@ur momisugly T. J. (re: 1:19am today) Thank you! LOL, well, us (yeah, only 1/8, but, still… heh) Norwegians are witty, indeed — “piz” is ancient Norwegian word for “jerk.” The years the “Peace Prize” went to a truly worthy recipient, the committee was taken over by some Swedish guys in disguise who came over and didn’t know what the deal was (JUST KIDDING). #(:))
Allan MacRae says:
October 25, 2013 at 8:53 am
“However, I suggest that countries that adapt well to winter have lower Winter Mortality Rates that countries that do not.”
Spot on there, swedish, and scandiavian, standards for insulation and heating are far ahead of what’s standard in continental europe and britain. Nothing strange with that really, it’s just a matter of adaption and payoff, do you need heating for six months or maybe just two or three, how worse will it be, -5,-10 or -30 or even -40. Sweden as an example stretches for more than 1600 km from south to north, 1600 km from southern Sweden ends up in southern Italy , so comparisions among european countrys are quite ricicoulus.
Ed Zuiderwijk says: October 25, 2013 at 1:13 am
Discussion this morning on the BBC about the fuel price problems.
On average winter cold results in 24000 excess death in the winter months in the UK. That puts a possible 300 in some perspective.
************
Small correction
Ed, 24,000 is the 2011-2012 Excess Winter Deaths for England and Wales only, down 8% from the previous year. Separate stats are kept for Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Excess Winter Deaths in England and Wales in 1950-51 totalled about 100,000 – so some progress has been made.
Excess Winter Mortality rates are typically much lower in colder Scandinavian countries, and higher in some warmer countries in Southern Europe like Spain and Portugal.
It is appropriate to pause for a while, and recognize that these were all real people, who “loved and were loved”.
Regards, Allan MacRae
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_288362.pdf
http://www.gro-scotland.gov.uk/statistics/theme/vital-events/deaths/winter-mortality/
http://www.nisra.gov.uk/demography/default.asp32.htm
The Old Observatory in Stockholm (built in the mid-1700’s) is a perfect candidate for the Urban Heat Island effect, I’d say. The city has expanded around it (the big new central City Library opening nearby in the late 1920’s, for instance) and road traffic has increased.
Deaths by “heat waves” is a minimal problem in Sweden, compared to deaths from cold temperatures! Not too uncommon is eg heart attacks induced by shovelling snow. Deaths from fires also increase during winter time because people are careless with candles. Road accidents increase due to icy roads. People tend to stay more indoors, with increases deaths from infectious diseases which are easier to pick up in confined spaces. And so on. (But I don’t think many actually *freeze* to death.)
This “study” is rubbish. Did they make any attempt at all to study deaths from cold weather?
–Ahrvid
(Stockholm, Sweden)
Great to see Swedish readers commenting here, and providing useful data. It all reinforces the notion that this “study” is hardly worth using in the smallest room.
On the face of it, the two silliest things when I read it are the very small numbers of “extra deaths” (without a scrap of evidence about why they died) and the ludicrous notion that temperatures which occur for a few days a year, that are not in the least bit remarkable over much of the inhabited world, could be killing people.
Where I live it gets up to the low 40s (C) in summer. Yet, we have the longest life expectancy in the country. The Stockholm maxima are just a pleasant Spring day to us. Go figure.
I hope this post of Anthony’s inspires Swedish readers to take down this load of baloney on blogs, in the media, and by any other means that they can find.
johanna says:
October 25, 2013 at 7:59 pm
Pleased to notice your appreciation of us ‘Scandinavians’ [Swedes] participating in commenting here. 😀
You can be assured, that we are quite a number reading/following, however not always commenting, WUWT and, of course, other sites with interesting info & discussions on the CAGW-topic. This mostly cuz the infos & ‘education’ via the ‘official channels’ are so biased and propagandistic it’s hard to believe could happen in a so called modern society. Increasing number of persons now (maybe thanks to the propaganda..?) look for other sources of information, predominally international blogs and websites – big thanks to Internet!
Cheers
/TJ
Allan MacRae says:
October 25, 2013 at 8:53 am
“Hi again Anthony,
Winter Mortality is greater than Summer Mortality across Europe (and elsewhere)…..”
I couldn’t agree more. Not only is this whole catastrophic corruption of science laughably wrong, it is completely immoral. It is a major reason why I no longer vote Conservative (I now vote UKIP). Miliband, Cameron and Clegg should be ashamed of themselves. At least Cameron is now talking about “rolling back green taxes”, so maybe there is a glimmer of hope. But I’m not holding my breath. At the very least Cameron will have to stop subsidising wind power and also scrap the Climate Change Bill, which is a trillion pound suicide note.
As I’m getting on in years, it may be that I will never vote Conservative again.
Chris
The methodology is based on counting “temperature extremes” which occur when the moving daily average exceed the 98% percentiles. So there’s a built-in presumption that temperature only affects mortality about 2% of time (other literature suggests something closer to 100%). They throw away about 98% of information about the relation.
Another assumption is that all changes in temperature extremes are caused by “climate change”. A surprising unreported conclusion is that climate change was clearly strongest in the 1940s.
The Epidemiology paper, table 2 contains counts of temperature extremes per decade calculated this way. The highest count is from 1940-1949, total 307 temperature extremes (91 heat, 216 cold). This decade happened to be excluded from the Nature analysis. 2000-2009 had only 136 (126+10) extremes, about a third. While the AGW signal has supposedly emerged in the last few decades, the number has generally declined. The two least extreme decades of the last half century were 1990-1999 and 2000-2009.
Sensitivity test: consider they had started their reference period from 1940 (after all they picked a seemingly arbitrary slice of the available data instead of using it all). If I counted right, the numbers become 1940-1969: 585 extremes and 1980-2009: 487 extremes. The result flips over and climate change saved lives.
maybe sign this thead up for the most idiotic one on www. its sad how many stupid people there are. one of my favorite is “1, 06, in other words non existing” can you please give me 6% of all your money for the rest of your life since its dosent exist.
there are so many moroons here: reading it was fun at first, but then it just make me sad.
polarbeer says NONSENSE at: October 28, 2013 at 1:07 pm.
Your post suggests that you are a troll, or you are otherwise incapable of intelligent comment.
Go back to drinking your beer.
I havent really read the study, but do they just count Deaths in numbers and not correlated to the number of people actually living in the region at the given years? In 1925 there was around 750000 people living in the Stockholm area. In the year 2010 that number is around 2000000 ppl. Also the amount of elderly people have increased a lot. Not having any numbers on that I can only say that the birthrate in Sweden is a problem and the population as a whole is getting older. People of old age tend to be more sensitive to temperature, hot OR Cold.
Excuse me in advance if I am being stupid and this is totally irrelevant or has already been taken into consideration.
Pär Brandt says:
October 29, 2013 at 5:17 pm
“Excuse me in advance if I am being stupid and this is totally irrelevant or has already been taken into consideration.”
Looking at the raw code from: http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/extref/nclimate2022-s1.pdf
Mortality variables:
Nday, (the number of daily deaths occurring in the total population)
Nday_65 (the number of daily deaths occurring in the above 65 population)
Code…..
To analyse the effect of temperature extremes on mortality the following code in R were used
#Analysis of temperature extremes per decade:
RR <- glm (N_dayi ~ as.factor(wday) + as.factor(hday)+ ns(trend,df=120) +
cw_lag025:as.factor(decade) + hw_lag01:as.factor(decade),
data=analys, family=quasipoisson)
#Analysis of temperature extremes total period 1980-2009:
RR <- glm (N_dayi ~ as.factor(wday) + as.factor(hday)+ ns(trend,df=120) +
cw_lag025+ hw_lag01,data=analys,family=quasipoisson)
#Analysis of temperature extremes year by year 1980-2009:
RR 65 have been subtracted from the total (1-2)
So, we can therefore assume that it’s been assumed, that death due to heat stress is linear between age zero and age 65.
I’m no expert in this area but that does appear to be a rather bold assumption, and if it’s not, there appears to be no reference to support it.
So, if you’re stupid, then so are we both.