Facebook Twitter Gplus RSS
magnify
formats

Increasing Trend of Hot Temperature Anomalies by City Tech Blogger Jiehao Huang

This study uses the daily summary data from NOAA’s Integrated Surface Database (ISD) (Smith et al. 2011). We focused on station-based temperature observations from 1979 to 2014 of three airports in the New York City area: John F. Kennedy (JFK), LaGuardia (LGA) and Newark (EWR).

Daily anomaly threshold is defined as two standard deviations away from the daily mean. In this case, the threshold changes daily, which aims to describe more day-to-day variability and details of the weather. The daily anomaly threshold indicates if the strength of the daily maximum is changing over time. Anomalies can also be classified as the weird events or outliers. The magnitude of the temperature anomalies is the greatest temperature in both the positive and negative direction during winter [Fig. 1].

This graph describes both the positive and negative magnitudes of temperature anomalies away from the mean, assuming mean is 0. The Black lines are the thresholds for each of the three different sites.)

In the order words, temperatures tend to deviate most from the mean in winter compared to summer. This plot shows temperatures change from  overall maximal are stronger in the winter. In addition, we further analyzed the frequency of these temperature anomalies monthly and yearly [Fig.2a – Fig3c].

                                                 Fig.2c  

(Bar graphs to show annual frequency of daily temperature anomalies in New York City for each site.)

 

 

Fig. 3a                                     Fig.3b                                Fig.3c

The annual frequency plot shows an increasing trend of hot temperature anomalies, while a decreasing trend for cold temperature anomalies occurred in past 36 years. These plots are related to the climate change and address the issues of global warming. Overall, we observed an increase in the frequency of anomalous daily precipitation and temperature events over the last 36 years (precipitation part are not shown).

 
 Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Reddit Share on LinkedIn
No Comments  comments 
formats

Utiagvik, Alaska, Ground Zero for Climate Change by ClimateYou Senior Editor George Ropes

It’s not nice to fool Mother Nature, but a computer algorithm at a weather station in the northern Alaskan town that used to be known as Barrow and is now named Utiagvik, doesn’t seem to mind. A recent story on Huffingtonpost by Ryan Grenoble told how the  National Center for Environmental Information (NCEI) has been collecting weather data since the ‘twenties,” but equipment breaks down over time, so NCEI employs an algorithm to flag anomalous readings, and omit outliers from its reports. Recently NCEI noticed that data from Barrow was missing for over a year. Had their instruments broken down? Upon investigation NCEI scientists discovered that the temperatures had been recorded, but were so high that they weren’t reported. https://www.desmogblog.com/willfully-blind

Since 1979 when measurements began, average January-September temperatures in Barrow went up 1.9°F, about twice that in the rest of the U.S. But in October-December of this year, the temperature gain was 7.8, 6.9, and 4.7°F, so high the algorithm kicked in and withheld the data. Turns out the equipment wasn’t broken, the climate was. As the weather warmed up, more ice melted, which led to higher temperatures and still more ice melting, a cycle that led the Smithsonian to call Utiagvik (Barrow) “ground zero” for climate change. It’s a frightening glimpse into our future.

 
 Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Reddit Share on LinkedIn
No Comments  comments 
formats

Powering America on Solar by City Tech Blogger Mohammad Raihan

How much of America would we need to supply with solar panels in order to achieve 100% renewable energy status? Not much. In order to provide enough energy for the United States. We would have to produce four million gigawatts of energy per hour. That’s a lot of energy, but if 2.8 acres of land produce 1 gigawatt of energy per hour we would have to use… 11,200,000 acres of land! However, the US all together is about 1.9 billion acres. That’s roughly around .6 percent of the whole of the United States. Easy, doesn’t seem so bad, all America has to do is just set aside .6 percent of land and put solar panels all over the land, and to show how much land would be required. Here’s a map of the US and the amount of land needed to cover.

https://www.good.is/infographics/solar-power-all-of-america

But things aren’t so simple as putting solar panels in an area and that’s that. We would have to worry about cloudy days, how are we going to store that much energy the solar panels would provide. Also, consider all the roads, power lines, and facilities we would need to create because of this, and that would expand the area needed greatly. Also, the wildlife would be affected in that area as well. All of this would cost money, A LOT of money. But, this would also create jobs, improve the economy, and we would set an example for other countries to follow our lead as well. Besides we wouldn’t even need to make all the renewable energy from solar. Wind and hydropower are viable options as well. Additionally, investing in research for solar panels that produce more, and batteries that store more energy are ways of reducing the amount of land needed. Furthermore, spreading the amount of land to different areas would be more beneficial as well. Creating solar farms around major cities would help cities’ economies grow and reduce wildlife disruption. The first step to actually achieving 100% renewable energy status is realizing just how much it would actually take.

 
 Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Reddit Share on LinkedIn
No Comments  comments 
formats

Thank You Barnard Bloggers!

We here at ClimateYou want to thank all 29 Barnard students who contributed to ClimateYou.org over the last few months. We were thrilled with the variety of climate change issues you chose to write about and how wonderfully you expressed your very personal concerns for the planet’s future. Special thanks to your professor, Dr. Christian Braneon, who co-taught the Agricultural and Urban Land Use course at Barnard College with Dr. Cynthia Rosenzweig at the Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

 
 Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Reddit Share on LinkedIn
No Comments  comments 
formats

St. Louis is Drowning by ClimateYou Assistant Editor Idiatu Jalloh

St. Louis is an archipelago city off the coast of Senegal. It was once the capital of the West African nation when Senegal was a French Colony. The city, often referred to as the Venice of Africa, is famous for being a UNESCO world heritage site. Along with this, it is currently known to travelers and locals for its beautiful French influenced architecture, colorful buildings that resemble the vibrant blue ocean right next to it. However, because of the rise in sea levels, St. Louis is also quickly becoming famous for drowning into the ocean. In fact, the United Nations designated St Louis as “the city most threatened by rising sea levels in the whole of Africa.” Alioune Badiane of the United Nations’ UN-Habitat agency, cites climate change and a failed 2003 canal project as the cause of this threat.  Climate change is exacerbating the problem because it is contributing to the rise in sea level, encroaching on the coast that separates St. Louis from the ocean. Currently, the city is being protected by a slender 17-kilometre spit of sand.

Even though Senegal is not producing carbon emissions at the rate of other countries such as China, the United States, India, or even fellow West African nation, Nigeria, it is in much more danger of suffering from climate change than those countries. The reason for this is because of Senegal’s location. With borders that include the Atlantic Ocean, the Sahel, and the Sahara, Senegal is in danger of suffering from rise in sea levels at the coast and from desertification at the interior. It is a paradigm of too much and too little water; the quintessential dangers of climate change

Already, one of the districts of the St. Louis has become a casualty to the rise in sea levels. District of “Doun Babe Dieye, settled by the Normans in 1364, was the first casualty among many districts of the Senegalese city of St Louis.”  The residents of the district were forced to evacuates as their town was taken over by ocean water only to , to move to other parts of the city that are also slowly disappearing.

The government of Senegal plans to spend seven million dollars to build a defense fortress that will protect the city from the ocean, but some residents who live in the city believe this is a temporary solution. From what they see, St. Louis is doomed to drown because every day, the ocean continues to rise. The government of Senegal cannot stop the ocean from rising, because this is a global problem that calls for a global solution. It is a climate change problem.

 

 
 Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Reddit Share on LinkedIn
No Comments  comments