2011-05-26 01:41:33Eli comment on Watts' paper
Dana Nuccitelli

Pretty interesting analysis of the Watts paper by Eli.

"clearly rural stations are relatively under-represented in categories 1 and 2, but relatively over represented in the worst three rankings....Fall, et al. fell off the carrot truck into the harvester because they did not correct for location bias which is a hoot and a half given how Watts and Pielke have gone on for centuries about the UHI, urban heat island effect, but this appears to be the RRE, the rural refrigerator effect."

2011-05-26 02:21:14
Julian Brimelow

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 05:00:49Dumb Questions???
John Hartz
John Hartz

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?

2011-05-26 05:23:53
Alex C


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 ;)

2011-05-26 05:35:59
Daniel Bailey
Daniel Bailey

In all things climatological, the trend is the thing.  Even on Coruscant (The Trend = The Force?)...