Are urban heat islands correctly defined and what is the big deal for climate warming.   By Dr Chris Barnes,   Manager at Bangor Scientific and Educational Consultants  http://bsec_wales.co.uk   First Published online 10th February 2025

 

Abstract

Urban heat islands  (UHI) cause and effect are briefly described and reviewed.   The paper enquires if we are correct about the causes of and components of UHI.  Calculations are made which show that waste heat has a far more major part to play in modern day UHI than previously acknowledged and the work of Bian (2020) in this respect is supported.   In a large city the waste heat contribution to UHI is shown to be some  1.6K to 2,7 K.   Averaged over the world this represents about 50 milli-Kelvin of warming which is greater than the figure for CO2 alone as supplied by  Smirnov and some 25% of the all cause warming figure quoted by Smirnov.    Electricity distribution networks are also briefly considered as a special case of waste heat and other energetic radiations capable of causing environmental change.   for example,  interactions  between HVAC power lines and space weather  and has shown there to be a very significant climatic effect,    http://www.drchrisbarnes.co.uk/eep.htm

The upshot of that work  is that we need either to switch entirely to HVDC  transmission or generate all power locally I order to remove the climatic effects of power generation.   Given that it has now been shown that the planet has  a relatively fixed  adiabatic lapse rate  substantially independent of gaseous  atmospheric composition, means that  we can  never, ever get rid of waste heat effects and no amount of decarbonisation will do so.   The big deal  for climate is that Net Zero will have just that.   Zero effect, absolutely zilch!!  The counter suggestion made here is that  we would be better employed simply  re-cycling  as much  heat as we can  and using  local all  local power generation.  Failing that use HVDC transmission or undergrounded HVAC transmission.      Likewise, we can redesign our cities and our houses to have less UHI.      

 

 

Introduction

Typically an  urban heat island is defined thus : "The relative warmth of a city compared with surrounding rural areas." This relative warmth is caused by "heat trapping due to land use, the configuration and design of the built environment, including street layout and building size, the heat-absorbing properties of urban building materials, reduced ventilation, reduced greenery and water features, and domestic and industrial heat emissions generated directly from human activities".

 

 

Figure 1

 

Generally speaking, the difference in temperature between the urban and surrounding rural area is more pronounced at night than in daytime.   For example, in the United States, the temperature in urban areas tends to be warmer than the surrounding area by about 1–7 °F (0.6–4 °C) during the daytime, and about 2–5 °F (1–3 °C) warmer at night. However, the difference is more pronounced during the day in arid climates such as those in southeastern China and Taiwan. Studies have shown that diurnal variability is impacted by several factors including local climate and weather, seasonality, humidity, vegetation, surfaces, and materials in the built environment.

 

Are we correct about UHI?

 

Traditionally, the idea is that the combination of concrete, bricks and tarmac acts in conjunction with the underlying soil as a sort of ‘storage heater’.   Heat is trapped and slowly released exactly as in a real storage heater.  

 

Moreover, where there are skyscrapers, these can act as to further funnel the sun’s rays to the ground by way of multiple downward reflections but also to confine access to updrafts for later and subsequent heat removal by convection.

 

The difficulty with the definition comes in two parts.   First is assessing the relationship   with Global Heating.   Are we looking at a driver or an amplifier?     Second, is assessing the dominant      component, i.e.  physical heat trapping or anthropogenic emission.  

 

The fact that temperature records in rural areas show completely different trends and significantly lower trends of increase from those in built up and city areas  tends to   suggest that UHI is a driver of change rather than an amplifier.      Yet many texts insist otherwise.   One interesting piece of work describes that UHI has contributed a spurious +.1C to overall temperature records in the Northern Hemisphere ( NH) in the first 8 decades of the 20th Century.     The Effect of Urban Warming on the Northern Hemisphere Temperature Average in: Journal of Climate Volume 2 Issue 3 (1989)[1]

In China for the period 1961-2023 it is estimated that UHI has given rise to almost 0.5 C of warming or over a third of all warming.  

 

Lui et al (2022) [2] found  through statistical analyses of satellite land surface temperatures (2002 to 2021), they found that the mean surface warming trend is 0.50 ± 0.20 K·decade−1 (mean ± one S.D.) in the urban core of 2000-plus city clusters worldwide, and was 29% greater than the trend for the rural background.

 

I would suggest inspection of figure 1 above to be instructive.     The data indicates total UHI in cities is approximately twice that in suburbs.    This suggests that a maximum of circa 2C is the ‘city’ effect.  That is about 50% of the total observed warming.  

 

Waste Heat:  the real culprit

It is very instructive to make a waste heat calculation here.    Under clearest sky conditions a maximum of  1140 W/m^2 has been recorded at the earth’s surface.  Averaged over the whole earth surface, however, this falls to some 200 W/m^2.    Assume this, long term, gives rise to an average earth temperature of some 387K.       An average house between both gas and electricity will be using an instantaneous  power of circa 1.5 KW.   Ultimately, about half of this energy finishes up as waste heat. Let the house have an area of 250m^2  and be losing 750 watts.   This translates to about  3 watts/m^2.     3 W/m^2 is 1.5% of the incoming solar energy.  This  increase 387K by 1.5%  yields   5.3K.    In a high density city about 30-50% of the area is houses and buildings.    This yields a figure of  between 1.6K and 2,7 K. 

 

Indeed Bian  2020  Environ Syst Res      [3]          https://doi.org/10.1186/s40068-020-00169-

Also concur  the present author’s  findings. 

 

This is suggestive of the fact that waste heat alone can more than account for the ‘city effect’ and has even a far greater part to play in actual or perceived warming then previously acknowledged.      Moreover, as technology has advanced far more homes have both summer air conditioning and winter central heating.  

 

The next question to answer is the degree to which UHI informs or causes  modern warming.  

One possible problem  is that the majority of temperature stations tend to be in urban and built up areas.  Urban areas are heavily overrepresented in the siting of temperature stations: less than 1% of the globe is urban but 27% of the Global Historical Climatology Network Monthly (GHCN-M).  This can only cause an over exaggeration  of both warming and be problematic for figures being fed into present climate models.  

 

In reality thus averaged over the globe the waste heat component of UHI is probably responsible for  about  50 milli- Kelvins of warming.   But likewise anthropogenic  warming usually ascribed to CO2 has also been vastly overestimated as a result of the above.     In this respect  Smirnov 2019 is extremely  instructive and shows all the warming due to CO2 alone to amount to a mere 20 milli Kelvin since 1850  and all cause warming to be only  0.4 C or 400 milli Kelvin., see Smirnov (2019) [4] 

 

 

Waste heat and power radiated from world  Electricity distribution networks.

 

There is one other element of energy production worthy of mention  and this has been raised by the present author elsewhere,     http://www.drchrisbarnes.co.uk/eep.htm [5]

   This is in connection with electrical energy transmission.    It is known that in HVAC transmission systems losses amount to about 6% and about half of that figure for HVDC.  

 

By extension  we can conclude since most transmission in the world is HVAC that some 3% of losses are I^2R  and will add a few millikelvins to the above figure.   However  where do the other 3% of losses go?   The subtle difference is that AC lines radiate EM energy whereas DC do not significantly.       The author has previously dealt  with the interaction  between HVAC power lines and space weather  and has shown there to be a very significant climatic effect,  [5].    Indeed  prior to the author’s work, the World's HVAC power grids were a hitherto unconsidered cause of climate and wx. changes.   Yet the leaked power harmonics they radiate into space could be many hundreds or even thousands of times the power of HAARP!!

The upshot of that work  is that we need either to switch entirely to HVDC  transmission or generate all power locally I order to remove the climatic effects of power generation.  

 

 

 

Future thoughts on UHI/Waste Heat: A massive deal for climate and the farce of Net Zero.

 

Given a fixed  adiabatic lapse rate  independent of atmospheric composition, as explained in the work of  Nikolov and Zeller,  (2017)  [6] and very importantly also  Ned Nikolov & Karl Zeller: Exact Calculations of Climate Sensitivities Reveal the True Cause of Recent Warming – Iowa Climate Science Education   May 2022 [7]  means that  we can  never, ever get rid of waste heat effects and no amount of decarbonisation will do so.   The big deal  for climate is that Net Zero will have just that.   Zero effect, absolutely zilch!!  The counter suggestion I would make here is that  we would be better employed simply  re-cycling  as much  heat as we can  and using  local all  local power generation.  Failing that use HVDC transmission or undergrounded HVAC transmission.      Likewise, we can redesign our cities and our houses to have less UHI.       

 

Inevitable warming and factors which we could control. 

Even with the above precautions, some anthropogenic warming may continue.  Moreover, natural warming  due to as yet poorly understood natural solar cycles and/or earth tilt/ and or earth hydrology/ and/or earth cloud cover could also happen or be happening.   

 

In any event,  the author is not in favour  of dangerous chemical means of climate control  such as  Stratospheric Injection.   However, in his opinion, it may be possible using simple aviation cloud,  adjusted for seasons and times of day and OTHER innocuous types of seeding  for cloud production or removal to produce virtually any type of weather or climate we seek.      Moreover, given the effects of EEP, electromagnetic methods of climate control should also not be overlooked.   

 

References

1.    .     The Effect of Urban Warming on the Northern Hemisphere Temperature Average in: Journal of Climate Volume 2 Issue 3 (1989)

2.    https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-022-00539-x

3.    https://doi.org/10.1186/s40068-020-00169-

4.    https://link.springer.com/article/10.1134/S0018151X19040199

5.     http://www.drchrisbarnes.co.uk/eep.htm

6.    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317570648_New_Insights_on_the_Physical_Nature_of_the_Atmospheric_Greenhouse_Effect_Deduced_from_an_Empirical_Planetary_Temperature_Model

7.    Ned Nikolov & Karl Zeller: Exact Calculations of Climate Sensitivities Reveal the True Cause of Recent Warming – Iowa Climate Science Education