EPA’s ‘Climate Change Indicators’ Website Pushes Heatwave Lies

Image: EC English

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency brought back its Climate Change Indicator’s platform last week. The platform claims various weather trends show, “Climate change is happening now … [causing] more extreme weather events.” This is false.

Data from the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) show incidences of extreme weather events are neither more frequent nor more severe than in the past.

Among the indicators that the EPA uses to show human carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are causing dangerous climate change are increases in heatwaves in the 50 largest metropolitan areas in the United States, from 1961 through 2019.

The EPA writes:

  • Heatwaves are occurring more often than they used to in major cities across the United States. Their frequency has increased steadily, from an average of two heatwaves per year during the 1960s to six per year during the 2010s.
  • In recent years, the average heatwave in major U.S. urban areas has been about four days long. This is about a day longer than the average heatwave in the 1960s.
  • Of the 50 metropolitan areas in this indicator, 46 experienced a statistically significant increase in heatwave frequency between the 1960s and 2010s.

The NOAA data EPA cites does show an increase in the number and length of heatwaves in America’s largest cities. That fact tells only part of the story, not the whole truth.

EPA’s heatwave report misleads about the causes of the increasing number of hot days (actually nights) in major cities and for the United States as a whole.

Several facts EPA buries in the fine print indicate supposed human-caused global warming is not causing an increase in the number and intensity of heatwaves in the United States.

First, EPA cherry-picked the 1960s – during a period of global cooling – as the baseline for its heatwave comparisons.

Nevertheless, heatwaves during recent decades remain far less frequent and severe than was the case during the 1930s.

PSI editor’s note: The graph below was produced by a retired former senior british government scientist, and shows how much warmer the 1930s were than today.

Indeed, a majority of each state’s all-time high-temperature records were set during the first half of the 20th century.

EPA grudgingly acknowledges this fact, admitting “Longer-term records show that heatwaves in the 1930s remain the most severe in recorded U.S. history.

The agency devotes only a single bullet point to this fact amidst multiple pages of heatwave alarmism.

Second, EPA downplays the role expanding urbanization and intensive human development in and around cities has played in driving measured heat increases (the urban heat island effect).

Even the climate alarmist group the Union of Concerned Scientist (UCS) remarks on EPA’s heatwave sleight of hand in an article titled, Four Things to Know—and a Word of Caution—about EPA’s Climate Change Indicators Website Reboot.

Human-caused climate change often intersects with other trends that affect climate locally or regionally, which often makes it tricky to answer the question. How much of what we’re seeing is due to human-caused climate change, and how much is due to other things?” writes the author of the UCS story. “Urban heatwaves are a prime example.”

The Union of Concerned Scientists article continues,

The data represent 50 urban areas across the United States—not the country as a whole. … What we’re likely seeing here is that urban areas have experienced a combination of rising temperatures, driven by human-caused climate change, and an increase in the urban heat island effect resulting from urban development. The page on EPA’s website that’s about this indicator includes information about the urban heat island effect, but it’s buried in the ‘About the Data’ section.

In its “About the Data” section, EPA writes:

As cities develop, vegetation is often lost, and more surfaces are paved or covered with buildings. This type of development can lead to higher temperatures—part of an effect called an ‘urban heat island.’

Compared with surrounding rural areas, built-up areas have higher temperatures, especially at night. Urban growth since 1961 may have contributed to part of the increase in heatwaves… This indicator does not attempt to adjust for the effects of development in metropolitan areas…

The fact that higher urban temperatures are reflected almost exclusively in higher nighttime lows, rather than higher daytime highs, demonstrates the urban heat island effect is the key factor to driving more heatwaves in cities.

EPA reports many of the temperature readings it referenced were at airports, which have grown considerably in size and traffic since the 1960s.

The cities themselves have sprawled into surrounding countrysides. Rural areas have become swallowed by asphalt, concrete, dark rooftops, and covered with multiple sources of artificial heat such as homes, businesses, plus the heaters, air conditioners, traffic, and artificial sources of light associated with them.

These surfaces absorb heat during the day, only to release it slowly at night, resulting in higher measured nighttime low temperatures.

The first-ever comprehensive review of the quality of data, coming from the National Weather Service’s (NWS) network of stations, examined more than 850 stations. It found that 89 percent of the stations, nearly nine of every 10, fail to meet NWS’s own siting requirements for trustworthy measurements.

As shown in the figure below, the most accurate nationwide temperature station network, the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN), shows no increasing trend in high temperatures in the United States since it was established in 2005.

The USCRN was specifically assembled to counteract the recognized bias in NWS temperature measurements and trends resulting from increased urbanization.

As cities grow, they get hotter, especially at night. Contrary to EPA’s assertion, there is no evidence that the increase in heatwaves in America’s 50 largest cities is due to global warming. Instead, the data indicate it is an artifact of urban growth.

This is a fact even climate alarmists like the UCS recognize.

See more here: climatechangedispatch.com

Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method

PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

 

Trackback from your site.

Comments (7)

  • Avatar

    Andy

    |

    More bare-faced lies the gullible will accept as proven beyond doubt.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Jerry Krause

    |

    Hi Andy and hopefully PSI Readers,

    “PSI editor’s note: The graph below was produced by a retired former senior british government scientist, and shows how much warmer the 1930s were than today.”

    Can you explain how it is that the PSI editor did not include a Fahrenheit scale on the right axis? 50C is about 122F. And why did the PSI editor not insist that of what this maximum temperature is and where it might be commonly measured?

    Louis Elzevir, publisher of Galileo’s ‘Dialogues …’ wrote: “Intuitive knowledge keeps pace with accurate definition.” The data of this figure is far from accurate definition.

    Have a good day, Jerry

    Reply

    • Avatar

      Andy

      |

      That chart is labelled maximum temperatures, meaning the highest that was measured somewhere on Earth. He used centigrade as we don’t normally use fahrenheit here anymore.

      Reply

  • Avatar

    Joe R.

    |

    ~1,100 ‘active’ volcanoes around the world at any one time (USGS.gov) all happy and “in-balance” with the world except for the effects of “mankind” ? Yeah right.

    Duck-Duck-Go search (cause goo gle is the devil) “Volcano eruption as seen from the ISS” and then search “Space Shuttle launch as viewed from the ISS” and compare the images.

    (Since we haven’t launched a Saturn Rocket in a long time) Nothing man has done, short of a nuclear weapon detonation, has released more energy into the atmosphere in as short a time as a shuttle launch, yet you can see from the above pictures that it doesn’t come close to a volcano.

    Stop (or stopper) one of those before you come beotching to me about the impact of Man on this planet. Mother Nature’s just raising us for fertilizer.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Francisco Machado

    |

    “increase in heatwave frequency between the 1960s and 2010s” – It’s worth recalling that we were, by the end of the sixties, entering a new ice age (from which we have now recovered). Headlines, news magazine covers treated that emergency as they now do our (at least reportedly) rising temperatures – the “end of civilization as we know it.” “Sacrifices must be made” has been the cry since the sacrificial alters of prehistory. It is very doubtful that any of the sacrifices stopped the climate from changing. We are in an interglacial period – past interglacials have grown warmer than our current climate.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    John J Craig

    |

    The Urban sprawl, buildings, highways, houses….etc. More humans on earth, the science says, humans give off a half degree of heat everyday, All the buildings, do not absorb CO2 like plants do, so the CO2 has no where to go, so the urban areas that are getting bigger everyday, means more CO2 in the air, because no plants are there to absorb it. Instead the EPA, uses GIGO, Garbage In-Garbage Out computer printouts to show whatever they want the Climate to look like!

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Barry

    |

    Once again we just confuse wx phenomena with climate. This rediculous idea that the climate was or ever will be a static system is to stupid for words,obviously climate is something that happens over a hundred thousand years or more. To do a complete climate cycle you have to consider the difference that occurs between ice ages as they seem to come and go at fairly regular intervals. This idea that the wx change that happens over thirty years or a hundred years is only based on mans arrogance,thinking that the wx endured in ones lifetime is what is important based on self importance. If they were really interested in climate they would have to consider all wx not just since we have started recording history.

    Reply

Leave a comment

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
Share via