The Urban Heat Island (UHI) is mapped in major U.S. cities

UGA study ranks US cities based on the urban heat island effect on temperatures

This graphic shows the annual average urban heat island effect in 2010. CREDIT University of Georgia
This graphic shows the annual average urban heat island effect in 2010. CREDIT University of Georgia

From the UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA

Highlights

  • Urban heat island (UHI) intensities were estimated for the fifty most populous cities in the USA using PRISM climate data.
  • The urban morphologies of the cities were quantified using spatial metrics and the NLCD 2006 land use/land cover dataset.
  • The statistical analyses suggested that highly contiguous dense and sprawling urban development both enhance the UHI effect.
  • City contiguity should be considered when devising strategies for UHI intensity mitigation.
  • More discontiguous city configurations, especially if achieved by introducing urban green spaces, will likely reduce UHIs.

Athens, Ga. – Inner cities as well as suburbs show distinctly warmer temperatures–known as the urban heat island effect–than rural areas as a result of land use and human activities, which can affect rainfall, air quality and public health.

A University of Georgia study using a new method for calculating urban heat island intensities clarifies the conflict on whether urban density or sprawl amplify these effects more. It also provides a ranking of the top urban heat island cities among the 50 largest metropolitan statistical areas.

The urban heat island effect describes how the spatial configuration of cities, the materials in them (such as asphalt), lack of vegetation and waste heat can modify temperature.

The study, published in the journal Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, identifies Salt Lake City, Miami and Louisville as the top three urban heat island cities in the U.S.

Urban morphology–the patterns of a city’s physical configuration and the process of its development–has long been associated with the formation of urban heat islands. By examining the UHI intensities of 50 cities with various urban morphologies, the researchers evaluated the degree to which city configuration influences the UHI effect.

“The overall goal of our study was to clarify which urban form–sprawl or more-dense development–is most appropriate for UHI mitigation,” said the study’s lead author Neil Debbage, doctoral student in the Franklin College of Arts and Sciences’ department of geography.

The study establishes a method for estimating UHI intensities using PRISM–Parameter-elevation Relationships on Independent Slopes Model–climate data, an analytical model that creates gridded estimates by incorporating climatic variables (temperature and precipitation), expert knowledge of climatic events (rain shadows, temperature inversions and coastal regimes) and digital elevation.

The use of spatially gridded temperature data, rather than urban versus rural point comparisons, represents a new method for calculating a city’s canopy heat island intensity. The results identify the spatial contiguity of developed areas as a significant factor influencing the magnitude of the heat island effect.

“Not just whether cities have high-density development, but how the built infrastructure is connected–and disconnected by green spaces–has a great impact on heat island intensity,” said study co-author Marshall Shepherd, the UGA Athletic Association Distinguished Professor of Geography and Atmospheric Sciences.

“We found that more contiguous sprawling and dense urban development both enhanced UHI intensities. In other words, it does not appear to be a simplistic either-or situation regarding sprawl or density,” Debbage said.

The researchers hope the results can help influence local governments and city planners in the formulation of effective codes and policies to mitigate the urban heat island effect.

“It’s crucial to work toward a better understanding of the complex processes at the intersection of urbanization, climate and human health,” Shepherd said. “Current and future cities will be modified or designed with weather and climate in mind, and research at UGA will play a key role.

###

The study on “The Urban Heat Island Effect and City Contiguity” is available at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0198971515300089.

Abstract

The spatial configuration of cities can affect how urban environments alter local energy balances. Previous studies have reached the paradoxical conclusions that both sprawling and high-density urban development can amplify urban heat island intensities, which has prevented consensus on how best to mitigate the urban heat island effect via urban planning. To investigate this apparent dichotomy, we estimated the urban heat island intensities of the 50 most populous cities in the United States using gridded minimum temperature datasets and quantified each city’s urban morphology with spatial metrics. The results indicated that the spatial contiguity of urban development, regardless of its density or degree of sprawl, was a critical factor that influenced the magnitude of the urban heat island effect. A ten percentage point increase in urban spatial contiguity was predicted to enhance the minimum temperature annual average urban heat island intensity by between 0.3 and 0.4 °C. Therefore, city contiguity should be considered when devising strategies for urban heat island mitigation, with more discontiguous development likely to ameliorate the urban heat island effect. Unraveling how urban morphology influences urban heat island intensity is paramount given the human health consequences associated with the continued growth of urban populations in the future.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

175 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
E. G. Martin
September 19, 2015 11:56 am

The basic bottom line is: “How much of the 0.8 deg. C. temperature increase since 1850 is actually UHI.?

E. G. Martin
September 19, 2015 11:58 am

the basic bottom line is: “How much of the 0.8 deg. C temperature increase since 1850 is actually UHI ?

Bill Parsons
September 19, 2015 4:02 pm

Old Engineer: I agree that the U of Georgia paper is ostensibly about city planning and the breathtaking finding that “contiguity” is the real problem in dissipating UHI effects. Therefore, let us eschew contiguity… but, by the way our paper ALSO clearly shows that the overall UHI effect, though real, is hardly a problem since many cities are actually cooler than their surrounding land masses – therefore a “negative UHI” (or UCI)
The John Christy / William Norris paper discussed here at WUWT several years ago left an impression on me, and though its premise was met with some skepticism, I agreed with it. See:
IRRIGATION-INDUCED WARMING IN CENTRAL CALIFORNIA? John R. Christy and William B. Norris. University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville (original paper)
https://ams.confex.com/ams/pdfpapers/68739.pdf (original paper); and
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/12/christy-on-irrigation-and-regional-temperature-effects/
(WUWT commentary and discussion)
The idea of Christy’s paper is that irrigated areas retain the day’s heat and expel it very slowly at night as the slow evaporation over crops and fields occurs. The heat is held close to ground level in a layer of high humidity, and if you take readings from within this blanket of warm humid air, the resulting temperature records appear to give lower highs during the day and higher minimum temps at night.
All the old cans of worms need to be reopened for this paper to examine when, where and how these researchers took their readings, what data they selected to analyze, and how they chose to analyze it. Depending upon these several points, they could easily prove cooler urban areas relative to… something else. How they define that “something else” seems a little fishy.
The researchers claim that “Denver” is such an example of “negative UHI”. The rough square in the middle of Colorado is blue because Denver is actually “cooler” than its surroundings. The square they’ve chosen is about 90 x 130 miles, or 11,700 square miles. The Denver metro area is, in fact, only about 155 square miles, so they’ve incorporated a huge chunk in the NE quadrant of the state for some reason, to contrast to the urban center. Why? My sense is that they gather data from within that giant section from which they can generate a rural temperature record. Key, here, is that much of this territory is agricultural and heavily irrigated. Zoom in on the quadrant in Google maps and you can see the wheels of contiguous green (from circular sprayers) dotting the landscape along the I-76 corridor all the way out the n-e corner of the state. This is heavily irrigated crop land – quite likely to yield the kinds of temps that they want for their purposes.
Again, if they took their temps at the right time, using the right areas in this sampling, they’d have no problem setting up a false comparison between urban and rural temps.
My 2 cents.

Gary Pearse
September 20, 2015 2:56 pm

Put thermometers on city buses and generate the data. Or deploy a network of stationary thermometers – automatic recording ones. You know that modeling has gone beyond the bounds of sensibleness when you don’t measure directly what is so easily possible. They have ridiculous huge polygons with legends that show ridiculous T ranges with bin limits in ridiculous decimal pointed numbers. A computer creation by idiots. Oh, I guess there was probably what some might call intelligent human intervention when the numbers came out to 10 decimal places in the raw.

Resourceguy
September 21, 2015 8:13 am

It’s the first map of “He Who Must not be Named” in PC public conversations.

Resourceguy
September 22, 2015 8:01 am

Now let’s look at what “good planning” enforces on investors and businesses for required numbers of asphalt parking places for each and every building permit. I don’t think Europeans visiting American cities realize what “good planning” has done over time to alter the landscape and the temperatures.

Brian R
September 24, 2015 12:26 pm

I was just looking over the UHI ma above. I’m not sure about other “urban” areas they but the Denver area includes thousands of square miles that are not “urban” by any definition. The area includes all of Arapahoe and Adams counties which extend 50+ miles to the east of the “urban” area. It also includes all of Clear Creek, Gilpin and Park counties which are entirely mountainous with the largest city/town at a population of about 1,700 at an elevation of 7,500 feet. A full 2,000 fee higher than Denver official elevation. Fairplay, which is in Park county, is 50 miles from the “urban” area and almost 65 miles from the center of Denver, is at 9,900 feet elevation.
Park county has a population of about 16,000 in 2,200 square miles. I don’t see how anybody could include these in the “urban” area of Denver.

Verified by MonsterInsights