Quote:

LA is testing a pavement treatment that can drop street temperatures by 12 degrees Dark pavement can contribute to these higher temperatures, but a new asphalt treatment could reportedly cut street temperatures by as many as 6.6 degrees Celsius (12 degrees Fahrenheit) after just one coat. Black asphalt absorbs between 80 and 95 of sunlight, but the “cool pavement” treatment marketed by the California-based sealcoating firm GuardTop reflects it. This could have a big impact on street temperatures and make life more comfortable for people in urban environments. After successful testing the treatment in parking lots, Los Angeles is ready to be the first major city to put it through its paces on a public road. Officials will monitor how residents react to the new pavement, as well as how long it takes for traffic conditions to soil the gray coloration of the coating. As Alan Barreca, an environmental science professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, told AFP, “Lower temperatures — due to the pavement — mean less reliance on air conditioning. So, that means less greenhouse gases.” http://www.businessinsider.com/la-tests-a-pavement-treatment-that-can-drop-street-temperatures-2017-8?IR=T

Those who believe in the global warming religion will never mention increasing use of dark pavement and roads contributing to warmer temps because it doesn't fit in with their religious beliefs.

Of course we know about the Urban Heat Island effect.

If the treatment works it should make cities more comfortable, more so when EVs are the majority of vehicles in the streets.

Thanks for the info, Baron!

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 28^th, 2017 at 8:01pm:

Of course we know about the Urban Heat Island effect.

Yes. It is just the adjustments that are problematic. ;)

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 28^th, 2017 at 8:01pm:

Of course we know about the Urban Heat Island effect. If the treatment works it should make cities more comfortable, more so when EVs are the majority of vehicles in the streets. Thanks for the info, Baron!

Really.
yet when I posted photos proving monitoring stations were being affected by it You never said anything and simply ignored it.

Like Usual... :D :D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ::)

And of course the fact that BoM has moved to smaller Stevenson Screens which are putting a warming bias on temperatures.

When are temperatures not real temperatures, but an artefact?

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 28^th, 2017 at 8:01pm:

Of course we know about the Urban Heat Island effect. If the treatment works it should make cities more comfortable, more so when EVs are the majority of vehicles in the streets. Thanks for the info, Baron!

Yeh, but.... it's the numbers that count!

lee wrote on Aug 28^th, 2017 at 8:54pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 28th, 2017 at 8:01pm: Of course we know about the Urban Heat Island effect. Yes. It is just the adjustments that are problematic. ;)

Lol, lee is doing the old nihilistic dance that society expects of him  ;) ;)

^{Thanks lee: sounds very _(in)formative to us all  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D}

lee wrote on Aug 28^th, 2017 at 9:00pm:

And of course the fact that BoM has moved to smaller Stevenson Screens which are putting a warming bias on temperatures. When are temperatures not real temperatures, but an artefact?

Lee doesn't even know what "temperature" is  ;) ;)

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 28^th, 2017 at 8:01pm:

Of course we know about the Urban Heat Island effect. If the treatment works it should make cities more comfortable, more so when EVs are the majority of vehicles in the streets. Thanks for the info, Baron!

LOL
Really.
Yet YOU accept data from Urban Heat Islands some monitoring stations in the most precarious positions as I have shown and YOU have ignored.

Oh dearie dearie me.... :D :D :D :D :D

Grendel wrote on Sep 10^th, 2017 at 1:14pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 28th, 2017 at 8:01pm: Of course we know about the Urban Heat Island effect. If the treatment works it should make cities more comfortable, more so when EVs are the majority of vehicles in the streets. Thanks for the info, Baron! LOL Really. Yet YOU accept data from Urban Heat Islands some monitoring stations in the most precarious positions as I have shown and YOU have ignored. Oh dearie dearie me.... :D :D :D :D :D

Its almost sad to see someone fall for the denialist mantra so completely.
Do you really think that scientists wouldn't make allowances for the heat island effect? It's called homogenization, and it allows for changes in the environment around weather stations.

But of course the denialists are also critical of homogenization, so it seems you will never be satisfied.

Stop being a denialist without arguments then. :D :D :D :D :D

The_Barnacle wrote on Sep 10^th, 2017 at 2:43pm:

Do you really think that scientists wouldn't make allowances for the heat island effect? It's called homogenization, and it allows for changes in the environment around weather stations. But of course the denialists are also critical of homogenization, so it seems you will never be satisfied.

Yes. Homogenisation. A manual adjustment of temperatures with nothing to show methodology, no reference to the surrounding sites from which the homogenisation was done. No notes.

No replicability. If it can't be replicated it isn't science. This homogenisation is done by "scientists" isn't it?

This is the the same scientists you said used "world's best practice" in 2012?

Did they regress from "world's best practice" for 2015?

Is it the same "world's best practice" as 2015?

If it wasn't science in 2015, was it science in 2012?