|2011-05-26 01:41:33||Eli comment on Watts' paper|
Saw that...Josh sure knows how to throw a cat amongst the pigeons. Very sharp guy and not someone to be toyed with....
|2011-05-26 05:00:49||Dumb Questions???|
If I'm standing on the tarmac of an airport that was surrounded by farmland say 30 yeras ago, but now is surrounded by suburbia, I experience the actual heat that is present at the moment.
Why do corrections need to be made for the UHI effect?
If cities are hotter than rural areas, then cities are hotter than rural areas.
Why isn't the construction of cities considered to be an activity of mankind just like the burning of fossil fuels?
I would imagine it's because the temperature increase falls off dramatically as you move away from the heat source. Urban areas are too sparse area-wise and generate too much local heat to be ignored on an individual station basis, especially if the station contains a record of rural --> urban. Of course, trends within the urban and rural time frames themselves seem to be the same, from what I've read.
If we lived on Coruscant, then the UHI might be a more important global factor resulting from human activity ;)
In all things climatological, the trend is the thing. Even on Coruscant (The Trend = The Force?)...