Bacon's Rebellion

It’s Not the Heat, It’s the Humidity

There’s a lot of nonsense spouted about Global Warming. The globe may, in fact, be getting warmer on average. But GW theory suggests that the warming will be most notable in areas with the lowest humidity — the polar regions and the deserts. The impact will be least noticeable in places like Virginia with lots of moisture in the air to absorb the sun’s energy. But every time we have a heat wave — like the one we’re experiencing right now — people start saying, “That’s global warming for you.”

If the GW “consensus” (or “orthodoxy,” take your pick) is correct, we do need to worry about the impact on the Arctic and Antarctic ice packs, the resulting release of massive quantities of water into the oceans, and the ensuing rise in sea levels. But let’s not get our tighty-whities all knotted up over the prospect of endless summers here in the Old Dominion.

Let’s take a look at the historical data for the city of Richmond published by the Wakefield office of the National Weather Service — an organization, incidentally, that has no connection to the controversial former state climatologist, Patrick Michaels.

Do you see a long-term pattern? I don’t. (Click on images for clearer resolution.)

The main departure from the norm was the 1960s, when temperatures took a big dip. That’s back when people started worrying about the onset of a new ice age. After that, we’ve returned to a pattern that appears remarkably stable over a long time. If the average temperature has risen at all, the increase has been very small indeed.

That’s the average temperature, you say. How about temperature extremes? Here’s the data for years ranked by the number of days with temperatures over 90. This doesn’t include the last three years, so it’s likely that 2007 would make the list. The only other comparably hot year in recent history was 2002. But look — 2000 had among the fewest hot days.

Moral of the story: There are lots of good reasons stemming from national security, the economy and pollution from fossil fuel combustion to support the causes of conservation, energy efficiency and renewable fuels. I worry that people are getting so caught up in the Global Warming thing that, if the bubble is ever punctured, the cause of conservation could be discredited as well. And that would be a genuine catastrophe: With Global Warming or without it, energy conservation is a good idea.

Exit mobile version