From the National Center for Atmospheric Research/University Corporation for Atmospheric Research and the Department of “ignored data in favor of modeled simulations” comes this claim from Trenberth’s mountain climate alarm lair. Only one problem: actual data on U.S. Temperature Extremes does not support the claim. See below.
Interaction of warming climate with a growing, shifting population could subject more people to sweltering conditions
BOULDER – U.S. residents’ exposure to extreme heat could increase four- to six-fold by mid-century, due to both a warming climate and a population that’s growing especially fast in the hottest regions of the country, according to new research.
The study, by researchers at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and the City University of New York (CUNY), highlights the importance of considering societal changes when trying to determine future climate impacts.
“Both population change and climate change matter,” said NCAR scientist Brian O’Neill, one of the study’s co-authors. “If you want to know how heat waves will affect health in the future, you have to consider both.”
Extreme heat kills more people in the United States than any other weather-related event, and scientists generally expect the number of deadly heat waves to increase as the climate warms. The new study, published May 18 in the journal Nature Climate Change, finds that the overall exposure of Americans to these future heat waves would be vastly underestimated if the role of population changes were ignored.
The total number of people exposed to extreme heat is expected to increase the most in cities across the country’s southern reaches, including Atlanta, Charlotte, Dallas, Houston, Oklahoma City, Phoenix, Tampa, and San Antonio.
The research was funded by the National Science Foundation, which is NCAR’s sponsor, and the U.S. Department of Energy.
Climate, population, and how they interact
For the study, the research team used 11 different high-resolution simulations of future temperatures across the United States between 2041 and 2070, assuming no major reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. The simulations were produced with a suite of global and regional climate models as part of the North American Regional Climate Change Assessment Program.
Using a newly developed demographic model, the scientists also studied how the U.S. population is expected to grow and shift regionally during the same time period, assuming current migration trends within the country continue.
Total exposure to extreme heat was calculated in “person-days” by multiplying the number of days when the temperature is expected to hit at least 95 degrees by the number of people who are projected to live in the areas where extreme heat is occurring.
The results are that the average annual exposure to extreme heat in the United States during the study period is expected to be between 10 and 14 billion person-days, compared to an annual average of 2.3 billion person-days between 1971 and 2000.
Of that increase, roughly a third is due solely to the warming climate (the increase in exposure to extreme heat that would be expected even if the population remained unchanged). Another third is due solely to population change (the increase in exposure that would be expected if climate remained unchanged but the population continued to grow and people continued to moved to warmer places). The final third is due to the interaction between the two (the increase in exposure expected because the population is growing fastest in places that are also getting hotter).
“We asked, ‘Where are the people moving? Where are the climate hot spots? How do those two things interact?'” said NCAR scientist Linda Mearns, also a study co-author. “When we looked at the country as a whole, we found that each factor had relatively equal effect.”
At a regional scale, the picture is different. In some areas of the country, climate change packs a bigger punch than population growth and vice versa.
For example, in the U.S. Mountain region–defined by the Census Bureau as the area stretching from Montana and Idaho south to Arizona and New Mexico–the impact of a growing population significantly outstrips the impact of a warming climate. But the opposite is true in the South Atlantic region, which encompasses the area from West Virginia and Maryland south through Florida.
Exposure vs. vulnerability
Regardless of the relative role that population or climate plays, some increase in total exposure to extreme heat is expected in every region of the continental United States. Even so, the study authors caution that exposure is not necessarily the same thing as vulnerability.
“Our study does not say how vulnerable or not people might be in the future,” O’Neill said. “We show that heat exposure will go up, but we don’t know how many of the people exposed will or won’t have air conditioners or easy access to public health centers, for example.”
The authors also hope the study will inspire other researchers to more frequently incorporate social factors, such as population change, into studies of climate change impacts.
“There has been so much written regarding the potential impacts of climate change, particularly as they relate to physical climate extremes,” said Bryan Jones, a postdoctoral researcher at the CUNY Institute for Demographic Research and lead author of the study. “However, it is how people experience these extremes that will ultimately shape the broader public perception of climate change.”
###
About the article
Title: Future population exposure to U.S. heat extremes
Authors: Bryan Jones, Brian C. O’Neill, Larry McDaniel, Seth McGinnis, Linda O. Mearns, and Claudia Tebaldi
Publication: Nature Climate Change doi:10.1038/nclimate2631
Actual data doesn’t seem to support the claim of increasing high temperatures
Above, “Heat Wave Index” (yellow line) from the US COOP Network and CO2 level (red line, right scale). Orange line is the linear trend for the entire period., Data source: NOAA. Graphed by Willis Eschenbach
“Extreme heat kills more people in the United States than any other weather-related event…”
Not according to the CDC.
2006-2010:
Excessive natural heat, heat stroke, sun stroke-
3,336 (31%)
Excessive natural cold, hypothermia, or both-
6,660 (63%)
I think I can safely stop reading there.
Nicely done.
a population that’s growing especially fast in the hottest regions of the country, according to new research.
============
why are the hottest regions the fastest growing if warming is a problem? Why do people move to Florida and Texas? Why don’t they move to Alaska or Minnesota?
This article makes the all too common mistake of assuming that a warming world will primarily manifest on top of the measured high temperatures rather than showing up at the bottom of the thermometer during winters and nights that aren’t quite as cold as in my grandpappy’s day. When the temperature goes from 110 to 115 degrees, people can die, but when they go from 60 to 65, nobody dies.
“due to both a warming climate and a population that’s growing especially fast in the hottest regions of the country, according to new research”
Are older peoble in US suicidal, since they move to Florida and other hot places.
I found an article by Steven Goddard that verifies my “number of air conditioning” days observations in Michigan… been here for over 40 years. https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/07/11/ninety-degree-days-in-michigan-down-50-over-the-last-80-years/
I guess other places can send their excess here.
In the words of the late sam kinnison:
“MOVE”
Extreme heat kills more people in the United States than any other weather-related event
That is a flat out lie.
Why are such people not prosecuted, punished, and banned from ever serving in whatever profession they pollute ever again?
‘Only one problem: actual data on U.S. Temperature Extremes does not support the claim. ‘
Given the first rule of climate science is, if reality and models differ in value it is reality which is error , there is problem at all.
There would only be a problem if they where doing good and honest science, and given they could never be accused of doing that , then they are home free.
“However, it is how people experience these extremes that will ultimately shape the broader public perception of climate change.”
The only thing to do then is to ban air conditioning and heating so people will be forced to experience these extremes. Then they’ll be convinced that extremes are actually getting worse even if they aren’t. Apparently, it’s “public perception,” rather than actual facts and observations that are important to these people.
With 50 – 75% wind/solar electricity genertion there will be no need to curtail the use of AC, you will not be able to afford it. Period.
“the population is growing fastest in places that are also getting hotter”
Why do all these stupid people keep moving to warmer climates when 97% of climate scientists know that a warmer climate is bad for you? Can’t they feel the extreme heat? Don’t they know they are doomed? /Sarc
We’ve got to tell those old people to stop moving to Florida, Phoenix and Las Vegas! They could be affected by the heat.
OK, that’s it I’m moving to Indio.
Enjoy the sand dunes..
“due to both a warming climate and a population that’s growing especially fast in the hottest regions of the country,”
Why would people move into an area that is increasing in temperature other than those moving from an area that is already hotter than that area now, Worse how many of those moving into the area that is a few degrees warmer then than it is now left from south of the boarder where it would be centuries before these extremes would be hotter/drier than where they live now. The prediction is pure B/S utter nonsense.
Assuming “current migration trends within the country continue” and applying them to 26-55 years into the future counts as a “newly developed demographic model?” Really?
Gives me an idea…how about we assume “current temperature trends within the country continue” and apply them to 26-55 years into the future using 11 high-resolution demographic models and see what happens.
It is true of course, but only because the population quadrupled.
Yeah, but just look at that grant money graph.
all hail to “The Models” they’re all seeing and all prevailing science
(do i need to insert sarc tags here or is it obvious enough?)
the more i read the alarmist side the more i think that they really should stick to the raw data which is showing something entirely different then their Models…
Of course the mighty all saving term “adjustment” does still exist to have that inconvenient truth covered……..
“Extreme heat kills more people in the United States than any other weather-related event”
Searching the CDC database for cause of death one can find that 725 people died of excessive natural cold (x31) and 372 of excessive natural heat (x30).
One has to ask in light of the data available from the CDC where the “Experts” get there data to support such statements.
I’m not a scientist and looking at studies like this I don’t want to be one neither.
Must be all those retired baby boomers moving to Florida.
I think there’s a typo – you misspelled “liar”