4.6 Article

Urban warming in the 2013 summer heat wave in eastern China

Journal

CLIMATE DYNAMICS
Volume 48, Issue 9-10, Pages 3015-3033

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00382-016-3248-7

Keywords

Urbanization impact; Heat wave; Surface energy budget; Positive feedback

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41475078]
  2. Strategic Priority Research Program-Climate Change: Carbon Budget and Relevant Issues of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [XDA05090105, XDA05090207]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The impact of urban warming during the 2013 July-August extreme heat wave event across the Yangtze River Delta (YRD) in China was assessed. Using a newly developed high-resolution, land-use dataset, urban stations were identified from a total of 101 stations in the YRD. The difference between urban and non-urban/rural stations indicates that urban warming reached 1.22 A degrees C in the 2013 summer heat wave. The new land-use dataset was then input to the Weather Research and Forecasting model to further understand the dynamical/physical processes of the urban warming during the heat wave. The model-simulated urban warming is similar to 1.5 A degrees C. Impacts of urbanization on near-surface temperature had strong diurnal variation, reaching a peak at 19:00 LST, around sunset. In the daytime, urban warming was mainly caused by enhanced sensible heat fluxes and longwave radiation from the surface. Because of reduced latent heat flux and increased heat capacity, urban ground stored much more heat than rural ground during the daytime, which is later released as sensible heat flux from the surface at night, leading to the nocturnal urban warming. The simulation results also suggest a positive feedback between urban warming and heat wave intensity, which makes the heat wave more intense in urban than rural areas and the urban warming during the extreme heat wave stronger than its climatological mean.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available