410 FTP

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLIMATOLOGY
Int. J. Climatol. 19: 989–1009 (1999)
URBAN–RURAL VAPOUR PRESSURE DIFFERENCES AND THEIR

ROLE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF URBAN HEAT ISLANDS
BJO8 RN HOLMER* and INGEGA8 RD ELIASSON
Laboratory of Climatology at Physical Geography, Department of Earth Sciences, Göteborg Uni6ersity, Box 460,
S-405 30 Göteborg, Sweden
Recei6ed 4 May 1998

Re6ised 14 December 1998
Accepted 17 January 1999
ABSTRACT
Data for a 4-year period from Göteborg, Sweden was used to investigate the urban – rural humidity differences during
clear and calm nights. The purpose was to analyse the impact of the Urban Moisture Excess (UME) on the Urban
Heat Island (UHI) with focus on the longwave radiation balance and the latent heat flux. The statistical analysis
demonstrated that a hot summer with reduced precipitation increased the mean UME to 3 hPa (‘normal’ summer
conditions demonstrated an UME of about 1 hPa) and during some nights the UME was as high as 7 hPa. The
analysis also demonstrated a positive correlation between UME and UHI, with the maximum UHI preceding the
maximum UME by between 2 and 5 h. An analysis of the nocturnal development of UME demonstrated that the
UME could develop from three combinations of urban and rural vapour pressure changes. The initial level of the
rural vapour pressure, and thus the conditions for dewfall proved to be important. The influence of an UME of 3 hPa
on the downward longwave radiation was calculated to about 3 W m − 2, which is 12% of the urban – rural radiation
difference giving a weak enhancing effect of the UME on the UHI. Advection of dry air from the UHI circulation
was considered to influence the urban vapour pressure change. After correction of the advective effect on the urban
vapour pressure change, the urban–rural difference in the latent heat flux ranged from −5 to −25 W m − 2, which
demonstrates that UME also has a considerable negative feedback on the UHI development. Copyright © 1999
Royal Meteorological Society.
KEY WORDS: high-latitude city; Sweden; statistical analysis; humidity; longwave radiation; latent heat flux; advection
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
This study has emerged from empirical observations made during the last few decades in Göteborg,
Sweden. A considerable variation in the heat island intensity has been observed, even when apparently
identical weather conditions prevailed, i.e. clear and calm nights. One of the field hypotheses is that a
considerable part of this variation depends on processes related to air humidity.
The question of the role of air humidity in Urban Heat Island (UHI) development is certainly not new.
Multiple regression analyses demonstrate a positive correlation between nocturnal heat island intensity
and vapour pressure (Sundborg, 1951; Emonds, 1954; Lindqvist 1970). These authors used vapour
pressure in their calculations, but their equations did not include urban–rural humidity difference.
However, several studies demonstrate that urban–rural humidity differences exist (Chandler, 1967;
Ackerman, 1971, 1987; Kopec, 1973; Hage, 1975; Adebayo, 1991; Lee, 1991; Jáuregui and Tejeda, 1997).
According to these studies, the urban – rural humidity difference displays both diurnal and seasonal
variations. In general, the diurnal pattern demonstrates an Urban Moisture Excess (UME) at night and
an urban moisture deficit during daytime. Winter values from temperate climates have been shown to be
* Correspondence to: Laboratory of Climatology at Physical Geography, Department of Earth Sciences, Göteborg University, Box
460, S-405 30 Göteborg, Sweden; tel.: + 46 31 7731955; fax: + 46 31 7731986; e-mail: bjorn@gvc.gu.se
CCC 0899–8418/99/090989 – 21$17.50

Copyright © 1999 Royal Meteorological Society
990 B. HOLMER AND I. ELIASSON
smaller (only up to 0.3 hPa) than summer values (up to 4 hPa) (Ackerman, 1987; Lee, 1991; Eliasson,
1993).
One interesting question is how this UME is correlated with the development of the UHI. Lee (1991)
demonstrated a good statistical relationship between the mean monthly vapour pressure difference and
mean monthly heat island intensity for London, but he considered the vapour surplus to be only an effect
of the UHI. So did Hage (1975), who stated that the urban–rural moisture differences did not appear to
play a crucial role in UHI development.
However, the radiative properties of water vapour imply that urban vapour excess will produce a
radiative force that ought to influence the UHI development. Observations demonstrate that the usually
warmer, more polluted and more humid urban atmosphere increases the sky longwave irradiance over the
city by 20–40 W m − 2 (Oke and Fuggle, 1972; Kobayashi, 1982; Estournel et al., 1983; Tapper, 1984;
Lindgren, 1997). To what extent this can be related to the UME is, however, not clear. Oke and Fuggle
(1972) and Estournel et al. (1983) considered that most of the observed differences were an effect of the
warmer air. By contrast, both Kobayashi (1982) and Tapper (1984) considered the aerosol to be the most
important factor in enhancing downward longwave irradiance.
Evaporation, condensation, advection and anthropogenic emissions of vapour are processes which are
considered responsible for urban – rural humidity differences. Chandler (1967) and Hage (1975) attributed
the nocturnal UME to continued evaporation in the city, whereas dewfall removes vapour from the
atmosphere to the surface in the rural area. Field studies of the actual processes display continued
evaporation in the city at night (Nunez and Oke, 1977) and a rural dew surplus of 20–50 g m − 2 (Holmer
et al., ‘Differences in hoarfrost and dew fall between urban and suburban areas’, manuscript submitted for
publication). Earlier studies also demonstrate that the UHI induces a pressure gradient directing a flow
of air at ground level into the city, the so called the urban heat island circulation (UHIC) (Okita, 1960,
1965; Schreffler, 1978, 1979; Wong and Dirks, 1978; Goldreich and Surridge, 1988; Barlag and Kuttler,
1990–1991; Eliasson and Holmer, 1990). This advection of rural air into the city could influence the air
humidity in the city. Tapper (1990) found that in Christchurch, New Zealand the rural air is drier than
the urban air up to 350 m. Together with a developed UHIC, this would result in a transport of dry air
into the city. On the contrary, both Hage (1975) and Ackerman (1971, 1987) argued that as a consequence
of rural humidity inversion an advection of humid air aloft into the urban area and a downward mixing
would result in increased urban surface air humidity. Except for Hage (1975), who made an attempt to
relate the relative importance of the processes for the wintertime development of UME, the literature is
sparse on this subject.
1.2. The present study

Most authors seem to have paid scant attention to the discussion of UME in UHI development. As a
consequence, the literature does not give an explicit answer to the relationship between UME and UHI.
In an attempt to investigate this relationship further, the following two questions have been formulated:
(i) Does the radiative forcing of the UME influence the UHI development?
(ii) Does the development of UME induce latent vapour fluxes important to the UHI development?
The authors’ hypothesis is that the radiative forcing of UME has a positive feedback effect, while the
latent vapour flux has negative feedback effect on the development of UHI.
The study is based on urban and rural humidity data from Göteborg, Sweden. The data base includes
4 years of measurements from permanent meteorological stations. The analyses which are focused on clear
and calm summer nights favouring UHI and UME development, include the following parts:
(i) A presentation of diurnal variations of the urban–rural vapour pressure difference (Deu − r) during
summers with ‘normal’ and dry weather conditions in order to demonstrate the possible ranges of
UME in Göteborg.
(ii) A qualitative comparison of the diurnal variation of Deu − r and DTu − r.
(iii) An analysis of the nocturnal trends of vapour pressure at the urban and rural sites, respectively in
order to increase the understanding of the processes behind the UME.
Copyright © 1999 Royal Meteorological Society Int. J. Climatol. 19: 989 – 1009 (1999)
URBAN HEAT ISLAND DEVELOPMENT 991
(iv) A quantitative calculation of the radiative effects of Deu − r.

(v) An estimation of the influence of advection on the Deu − r as a result of the influence of the UHIC
in Göteborg.
(vi) An estimation of the influence of anthropogenic moisture source on the Deu − r.
(vii) A quantitative analysis of the urban – rural difference in latent heat flux.
2. METHODS
2.1. The study area

The city of Göteborg (57°42%N, 11°58%E) is located on the west coast of Sweden (Figure 1). The area
is geomorphologically classified as a fissure valley landscape, dominated by a few broad and large valleys
trending north–south and east – west. The city is built-up around the shores of the Göta river valley. The
metropolitan Göteborg area, including the city centre and suburbs, has a population of : 700000.
The climate is a marine west coast climate with, mild winters for the latitude, − 1°C in February, and
moderate summers, 17°C in July (monthly mean values for the 1961–1990 period, Alexandersson et al.,
1991). There are many rain days, especially in the winter, but the precipitation is not greater than 750 mm
year – 1 (mean value for the 1961 – 1990 period, Alexandersson et al., 1991). The climate is rather windy; the
wind speed is about 7 m s − 1 in the winter and a little less in the summer (20-year mean value from a
former airport close to the sea). However, there are also a high number of clear and calm periods as a
result of the blocking anticyclones interspacing the midlatitude cyclones (Holmer, 1978). During the
blockings, a well-developed UHI appears together with an UHIC (Eliasson and Holmer, 1990).
Figure 1. Map of Göteborg showing the location of climatic stations used in the analysis
Figure 2. The frequency of clear and calm nights during 1988 – 1990 and 1994
2.2. The climatic stations

Data from one urban and one rural station was used for the analyses presented in this paper (Figure
1). The rural station, Säve airport, is a synoptic weather station, located 9 km north-west of the city centre
and 3 km east of the coastline (Figure 1). The surrounding landscape is relatively flat with broad valleys,
consisting of clay deposited during the last glacial period and small hills (30–50 m high). The sky view
factor at the rural site, estimated from fish-eye photographs by the method of Holmer (1992), is 1.0. The
proximity to the sea influences the station and heat island values calculated with data from Säve airport
should be regarded as minimum values of the Göteborg heat island (Eliasson and Holmer, 1990; Eliasson,
1994). The station is run by the Swedish Military Weather Service. Hourly data on temperature and
humidity at 2 m height, wind at 10 m height as well as data on cloud cover has been used in this study.
The urban station is located in an open area in the middle of the city. The sky view factor, estimated from
fish-eye photographs (Eliasson, 1994), of the open urban site is 0.99. Dense canyons surround the open
area with sky view-factors ranging from 0.51 to 0.83. The ground around the station is covered mainly by
gravel and is used for sport. The station is run by the Department of Physical Geography, Göteborg
University, for urban climate projects. Hourly temperature and humidity data measured at 2 m and wind
measured at 10 m height were used.
At both stations wind measurements were made with Vaisala Anemometers WAA 15 and Vaisala Wind
Vanes WAV 15 (thresholds of 0.4 and 0.3 m s − 1, respectively, accuracy 9 0.1 m s − 1 and 9 3°). The
temperature and relative humidity measurements were also made with Vaisala sensors, Pt 100 (accuracy
90.08°C at 0°C) and HMP (accuracy 92%), respectively.
2.3. Data analysis

The analysis focused on summer days with clear and calm nocturnal periods. The reason for these
limitations was twofold; the first reason was the well known fact that the UHI intensity is known to be
strongest during nights with light winds and clear skies and the second reason was that earlier studies
demonstrated greater UME values in summer, compared to winter (Ackerman, 1987; Lee, 1991; Eliasson,
1993). Nights with light winds and clear skies were identified by records from the rural station, Säve
airport. If the sum of the cloud amount observed from 19:00 until 07:00 h was B 23% of the maximum
amount possible, the nocturnal period was classified as a clear night. This definition follows the selection
rules used by the Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI) for classification of clear
days (Taesler, 1972). A similar definition of a calm night is, however, not available from the SMHI but,
consistent with the literature and the authors own experience, a night was defined as calm if the mean
wind speed between 19:00 and 07:00 h was B 2 m s − 1. The frequency of clear and calm nights during
these three periods is shown in Figure 2.
Two databases were created for the periods 1988–1990 and 1994, respectively. The databases include
24-h data (hourly values) with clear and calm nocturnal periods during the summer months May, June,
July and August. These data bases represent ‘normal’ and dry summer conditions. In a ‘normal’ Swedish
summer the weather is variable with alternating low-pressure westerly flows with precipitation and
blocking highs (Trewartha, 1981, p 251) and the conditions for evaporation are normally good. The
variable summer weather is evident in Table I which demonstrates that the deviation of mean monthly
precipitation and temperature from the mean 30-year period could be substantial for a single month in a
summer which is classified as ‘normal’. However, in 1994 the precipitation was extremely low in May and
July and the monthly mean temperature of July was nearly 4°C higher than the mean value for the normal
30-year period. In fact, July 1994 was the driest and warmest July in 100 years. The spell of drought led
to new weather records in southern Sweden and resulted in yellow leaves and defoliation on trees and
bushes.
Vapour pressures were calculated from available data by formulas according to Cerquetti (1988). The
humidity sensors used at the two stations were calibrated at regular intervals at each site. The sensors
were, for practical and technical reasons, not calibrated in parallel. Even though both sensors were of the
same type, systematic differences could not be totally excluded. For this reason, a statistical analysis of
urban–rural vapour pressure differences during summer nights with cloudy (6 octas or more), windy (6
m s − 1 or more) and dry (no precipitation) conditions at the rural station, Säve airport, was made. The
results demonstrated a mean difference of + 0.25 hPa between the urban and rural stations. It is,
however, difficult to say if this difference is a result of a systematic difference between the sensors or due
to the fact that the two stations are located nearly 9 km apart, one in a rural and the other in an urban
environment. The error is approximately equivalent to the instrumental error and was considered
acceptable.
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
3.1. Diurnal 6ariations of Deu − r

In the following section, the urban – rural humidity pattern in the Göteborg region during summer is
described. The analysis and discussion focus on the diurnal variation of the mean urban–rural vapour
pressure difference (Deu − r).
The diurnal mean variation of Deu − r during the two summer periods is shown in Figure 3. The analysis
is based on hourly data from the urban and rural stations from 16 clear and calm nights in 1988–1990
Table I. Monthly precipitation and temperature data from the rural station, Säve
airport, for the summer months of 1988, 1989, 1990 and 1994 compared to the
1961–1990 mean values
Precipitation (mm) 1988 1989 1990 1994 1961–1990
May 26 31 84 7 51
June 12 26 93 76 61
July 127 45 58 8 68
August 49 73 78 91 77
Temperature (°C) 1988 1989 1990 1994 1961–1990
May 12.7 10.9 11.6 11.3 10.9

June 16.9 14.9 15.0 13.0 14.9
July 16.6 17.0 15.8 20.0 16.2
August 16.0 14.6 16.2 17.4 15.6
Source: Väder och Vatten, 1988–1994; published by the Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological
institute.
Figure 3. Diurnal mean values of Deu − r during clear and calm summer nights 1988 – 1990 and 1994
and 37 clear and calm nights in 1994. The mean value of the period 1988–1990 shows an afternoon
maximum of nearly 1 hPa, but during the late afternoon (around sunset) the mean Deu − r was negative.
The highest value was reached 5 h after sunset (about 1.5 h before sunrise). In the early morning the mean
Deu − r was close to zero, but reached a third of its maximum during the morning hours. The analysis of
data from the dry summer of 1994 also demonstrated an increasing mean Deu − r during the hours
preceding sunset. From sunset to 7 h after sunset the mean Deu − r fluctuated around a value of 3 hPa. The
maximum mean Deu − r (3.2 hPa) occurred 3 h after sunset. In the early morning, the difference declined
and around midday the mean Deu − r approached zero. A second afternoon maximum of 0.8 hPa is evident
from Figure 3. The analysis also demonstrated that the maximum monthly mean UME during clear and
calm nights increased from close to 0 in May to 5 hPa in July (Table II).
3.1.1. Discussion. The results from the present analyses of urban–rural humidity differences in the
‘normal’ summers of 1988 – 1990 are in agreement with earlier studies in temperate climates (Table III).
The diurnal summer variations with the maximum urban excess at night, the rapid decrease in Deu − r
around sunrise when the difference changes from positive to negative values and the change from urban
deficit to urban excess at sunset agrees strongly with results presented by Hage (1975) and Ackerman
(1987). The additional daytime maxima agree with the findings of Ackerman (1987), who reported a
significant secondary afternoon maximum when the urban air was much more humid than the rural air.
Data from the extremely dry summer 1994 presented the opportunity to analyse how the urban–rural
humidity difference is influenced by a weather situation with restricted conditions for evaporation. Very
large urban vapour surpluses were observed in the summer of 1994. The maximum mean surplus was up
to 5 hPa in the month of July (Table II) but during some nights the surplus was as large as 7 hPa. This
large surplus must be related to the extremely dry and warm weather during this month. Only 8 mm of
Table II. The maximum mean (m.m.) DTu−r and Deu−r as well as the time after sunset
(t.a.s.) for m.m. DTu−r and Deu−r
Time period m.m. Deu−r t.a.s. m.m. DTu−r t.a.s.

(hPa) (h) (°C) (h)
1988–1990 1.4 5 4.5 0

1994 3.2 3 2.1 1
May 1994 0.3 5 2.3 1
June 1994 3.4 4 2.4 2
July 1994 5.0 5 2.5 2
August 1994 4.0 2 2.0 4
Data from the the two summer periods 1988–1990 and 1994, clear and calm nights.
Copyright © 1999 Royal Meteorological Society Table III. Result of some studies of the urban–rural humidity difference
Reference City latitude Type of study Conditions Urban area Rural area Maximum Maximum Importance of
and population UME UHI UME for UHI
development
Chandler, 1967 Leicester, 52°N, Car traverses August clear and High density Suburban 1.8 hPa 4.4°C
270 000 calm night
Ackerman, 1971, Chicago, 41°N Met stations April–September Urban airport Rural laboratory 0.45 hPa
1987 7-year averages
Bornstein et al., New York, ‘Instrumented Five early City Rural Urban 25% 1.4°C
URBAN HEAT ISLAND DEVELOPMENT

1972 40°N helicopter’ mornings higher, i.e. 3
hPa
Hage, 1975 Edmonton, Met stations June and July, Urban airport Rural airport 1 hPa ‘Not a crucial
53°N, 460 000 averages clear, 30 nights role’ (discussion
based on cooling
rates)
Kopec, 1973 Chapel Hill- Car traverse October clear Three level Rural Dew point City’s warmer
Corborro, 35°N, night buildings 4.5°F temperature pre-
29 000 vents dewfall
Bründl et al., Munich, 48°N Car traverse November Dense city Rural 2.5 hPa
1986 centre
Tapper, 1990 Christchurch, ‘Tethersonde Mean of 48 800 m north of 30 km south of 2.5 hPa 2.5°C
43°S, 300 000 profile’ profiles clear business district city centre
nights
Lee, 1991 London, 51°N Met stations 10-year, monthly Commercial Rural–suburban 0.9 hPa 2.6°C Linear relation-
averages centre airport (August/ (August/ ship r=0.835
September) September) ‘controlled by
similar although
Int. J. Climatol. 19: 989 – 1009 (1999)
not identical at-

mospheric pro-
cesses’
Jáuregui and Mexico City, Met stations Monthly averages Urban Rural 1.25 hPa
Tejeda, 1997 20°N for 1990 (July)
The Table gives data on the environmental conditions for the studies and the maximum UME (if possible, recalculated to hPa) and, if available, the maximum UHI. Any
statements about the relationship between UME and the UHI development is also given in the Table. Population data is included in the Table if reported in the reference.
995
precipitation was recorded at the rural station during the month of July according to Table I. Daily
statistics demonstrate that only 0.2 mm of rain fell during the period June 30–July 28 and the rest (7.2
mm) fell on July 29. In addition, the end of June (42 of the 76 mm recorded in June fell on June 3) and
the beginning of August (only 12 of the total 91 mm fell during the first 2 weeks of August) were relatively
dry. One explanation to the high urban humidity surplus is that the rural site experienced low humidity
as a result of a deficit of precipitation, while the water vapour from vehicle exhausts, industrial emissions
and irrigation of parks and gardens kept the humidity at a considerably higher level in the city. An
indicator of the irrigation was that the water consumption in Göteborg rose by 9% in July and 5% in
August 1994 (data from the City of Göteborg).
Contrary to the results of this analysis, Jáuregui and Tejeda (1997) observed smaller urban–suburban
humidity contrasts during the dry period than in the wet season in Mexico City. However, the suburban
site in Mexico City, the University Park, was irrigated during the dry season (Jáuregui, personal
communication). Thus, the results of Göteborg and Mexico City are not contradictory, but demonstrate
the importance of irrigation on vapour pressure during prolonged dry periods.
During the month of May the mean Deu − r was very small (Table II). This is probably an effect of the
weather conditions during May. According to the SMHI (Väder och Vatten, 1988–1994) May was drier,
but also colder than normal (several nights with frost, Table I).
3.2. The relation between Deu − r and DTu − r

During the two summer periods 1988 – 1990 and 1994 the analysis of the mean diurnal patterns of
Deu − r and DTu − r demonstrate that the maximum of the mean heat island intensity occurred around
sunset, that is 2–5 h before the maximum mean humidity difference was reached (Table II). The summer
of 1994 displays the lowest value, and an examination of the mean values for each summer month during
1994 demonstrates a somewhat different pattern. Table II displays a phase shift of 4, 2, 3 and − 2 for
May, June, July and August, respectively.
3.2.1. Discussion. It is evident from the results that UHI precedes UME. This phase shift indicates that
UHI is a necessary condition for continued evaporation/reduced condensation in the urban area, as
Chandler (1967), Hage (1975) and Lee (1991) assumed. Another possibility is that the phase shift depends
on different speeds of the processes involved. UHI depends to a very large degree on radiative processes,
while humidity depends on mass transfer whether it is condensation/evaporation close to the ground
(Chandler, 1967; Hage, 1975), or downward entrainment as a result of increased turbulence in the urban
boundary layer (Bornstein et al., 1972; Hage, 1975; Tapper, 1990). The phase shift between the two time
series of UHI and water vapour presented above is also likely to exert a negative influence on the
relationship between Deu − r and DTu − r. The literature does not pay much attention to the relationship
between Deu − r and DTu − r (Table III). The only statistical relationship presented is given by Lee (1991)
who demonstrates a good linear correlation between Deu − r and DTu − r (Table III). In order to compare
the data from this study with these results, a linear regression analysis was made using summer nights
from 1994. The results (Figure 4) demonstrated a lower correlation coefficient (rxy = 0.52) compared to
the one presented by Lee (1991). The lower correlation coefficient could be explained by the observed
phase shift. The different coefficients could also be explained by differences in databases. Lee (1991) used
mean monthly data for four different hours during a year while hourly nocturnal summer values were
used in the present analysis. In addition, the nonlinear relation between temperature and saturation
vapour pressure make the use of a linear regression analysis doubtful. The good relationship shown by
Lee (1991) is probably more dependent on the temperature level than the urban–rural temperature
difference.
3.3. Nocturnal 6apour pressure trends

The general pattern of urban – rural vapour pressure difference during clear and calm nights was
discussed in the above section. In order to increase the understanding of how this difference develops
during the night, the nocturnal pattern of vapour pressure was further analysed.
Figure 4. Statistical relationship between Deu − r and DTu − r during summer nights 1994
The analysis includes a comparison and interpretation of the nocturnal vapour pressure variation at the
urban and rural sites for all clear and calm summer nights during the period 1988–1990 and for 1994.
Each of the 51 available nights were analysed separately. The nights were classified according to the
nocturnal vapour pressure trends (increasing or decreasing) at the urban and rural site.
3.3.1. Typical cases. Three typical cases of nocturnal vapour pressure development resulting in an urban
surplus of vapour pressure were recognised through the analysis of the data (Figure 5).
Case 1—rural and urban decrease of vapour pressure: A nocturnal decrease of vapour pressure at both
the rural and urban sites was obvious during 12 of the 51 nights (Figure 5(a)). Despite the urban decrease
in vapour pressure, the mean UME during the night was 1.7 hPa. At the rural site, the vapour pressure
decreased 2 hPa between 1 and 7 h after sunset, i.e. with 0.4 hPa h − 1. At the urban site the vapour
pressure was high, even until 3 h after sunset, when the vapour pressure started to decrease at a rate of
0.37 hPa h − 1.
Case 2—rural decrease and urban increase of vapour pressure: During 24 of the nights used in the
analysis the nocturnal pattern demonstrated decreasing vapour pressure at the rural site and increasing
vapour pressure at the urban site (Figure 5(b)). The rural decrease started at sunset and was about 0.13
hPa h − 1 until sunrise. The urban increase started in the early afternoon and continued until a few hours
after sunrise at an approximate rate of 0.20 hPa h − 1. The different patterns at the rural and urban sites
resulted in a positive urban – rural difference which increased throughout the night. The mean UME
during the night was as much as 3.0 hPa.
Case 3—rural and urban increase of vapour pressure: During 15 of the nights the vapour pressure
increased at both the rural and urban sites (Figure 5(c)). At the urban site the vapour pressure increased
from 2 h before sunset to after sunrise. In the first part of this time span, the vapour pressure increase
was fast (0.46 hPa h − 1). Three hours after sunset, the increase slowed to a rate of about 0.15 hPa h − 1.
At the rural site the vapour pressure increased at a rate of : 0.20 hPa h − 1 until after sunrise. As a result
of the higher urban rate an urban – rural vapour pressure difference developed at sunset and increased
during the night. The mean UME during the night was 1.3 hPa.
3.3.2. The climatology. As the statistical distribution of the data (climatological variables) was not
known, the nonparametric Kruskal – Wallis test was used. The climatological variables tested were cloud
cover (rural station), temperature, vapour pressure and wind speed (rural and urban stations), as well as
the urban–rural differences in temperature and vapour pressure, i.e. DTu − r and Deu − r. Three levels of
significance (10, 5 and 1%) were tested and the data was arranged in time series in relation to the hour
of sunset (Table IV).
The results demonstrate a significant difference in urban vapour pressure between the three cases, for
all hours, especially in the afternoon and early evening (about 7 h before sunset ( − 7) to 1 h after sunset
( + 1)). The rural vapour pressure was also significantly different from 7 h before sunset to 4 h after
sunset, but not later in the night. Another interesting result is that the rural wind speeds were significantly
different between the three cases from shortly after sunset (+ 1 h) to around sunrise (+ 8 h) (Table IV).
This period coincides with the highly significant period of Deu − r. The urban wind speed, however, did not
display a consistent pattern. The temperature at both the urban and rural sites was significantly different
for the three cases during the hours before sunset and during the morning hours. The urban–rural
temperature difference was, however, only significantly different around sunrise. The difference in cloud
cover between the three cases was small and restricted to the afternoon and the hours before sunset. The
Figure 5. Nocturnal development of the UHI and the vapour pressure at the urban and rural sites. Mean values for clear and calm
summer nights for 1988–1990 and 1994: (a) Case 1—rural and urban decrease; (b) Case 2 — rural decrease and urban increase; (c)
Case 3—rural and urban increase
Table IV. Results from Kruskal–Wallis test of significant differences between Cases 1, 2 and 3
Time in Urban Rural De T urban T rural DT W urban W rural Cloud

relation vapour vapour rural
to sunset pressure pressure
−9 *
−8 ** **
−7 *** ** **
−6 *** ** * ** * *
−5 *** ** **
−4 *** ** ** * * *
−3 *** ** ** ** **
−2 *** *** ** ** * **
−1 *** ** * ** **
0 *** ** * ** * *
1 *** *** * * **
2 ** *** * ** ** **
3 ** ** * * * *
4 ** * *** * ***
5 ** *** ***
6 ** *** * * ***
7 ** *** * * ***
8 ** * ** * ***
9 ** ** ** ** **
10 ** ** * **
11 * ** ** *
12 * ** **
13 * ** ***
14 * ** ***
15 *** **
Significance levels; * =10%, ** =5% ***= 1%.
relatively small difference in cloud cover and wind speed is probably an effect of the basic selection of
data which was restricted to clear (B2 octas) and calm (B 2 m s − 1) weather conditions. Table V displays
the mean values of cloud cover, wind, temperature and humidity at sunset, and 3 and 6 h after sunset for
each of the three cases.
At sunset, the mean vapour pressure is highest for Case 1, lower for Case 2 and lowest for Case 3 at
both the urban and rural sites. This pattern is more or less consistent for up to 3 h after sunset, but 6 h
after sunset the differences level out.
A separate analysis of the wind direction on each of the 51 nights demonstrated no dominance of any
particular wind direction at sunset, but the winds were very weak, and 3 h after sunset calm was recorded
on 67, 88 and 40% of the nights for Cases 1, 2 and 3, respectively.
An analysis of the precipitation statistics from the rural station, Säve airport, demonstrated that
precipitation (rain) was recorded during 4 of the 51 days and was low (0.1, 0.2, 0.3 and 6.6 mm,
respectively). Three of these precipitation days belong to Case 3 and the fourth belongs to Case 2. All
days in Case 1 were thus free from precipitation. The precipitation did not seem to influence the vapour
pressure trends during the four nights.
3.3.3. Interpretation. The results presented above demonstrate that an urban surplus of vapour pressure
could develop from three different combinations of rural and urban nocturnal vapour pressure changes.
Rural lowering of vapour pressure seems to be an important, but not a necessary, condition for the
development of a positive urban – rural vapour pressure difference. The results also demonstrate that both
the starting time and rate of the vapour pressure changes at the respective sites are important. The three
different cases recognised above imply different importance of the physical processes, which result in
latent energy fluxes of varying directions and magnitudes.
One important question to answer is why three different cases could develop on nights with similar
weather conditions. The nights chosen for the analyses were all restricted to clear and calm summer nights
but the initial humidity level during the early afternoon seems to be an important factor (Tables IV and
V). In Cases 1, 2 and 3 the afternoon mean values of vapour pressure (hour − 7 in Figure 5), before a
major vapour pressure change occurs, is 11 – 12, 9–10 and 7–8 hPa, respectively. These differences in
initial humidity level could, at least in theory, explain some of the patterns displayed in Figure 5.
The analysis is based on two assumptions. The first is that the influence of vertical diffusion between
the urban boundary layer and layers above is insignificant as a result of the capping inversion during the
selected nights. The second assumption is that dry air is advected from the rural areas into the city. This
assumption is based on data from two earlier studies. Firstly, Eliasson and Holmer (1990) demonstrate
that there is a well-developed UHIC advecting air along the valleys in Göteborg and secondly Tapper
(1990) demonstrates that the rural air is drier at all altitudes up to 350 m in Christchurch, New Zealand.
Unfortunately, no systematic observations of the vertical humidity are available for Göteborg, but
sporadic measurements indicate that the conditions in Göteborg are similar to those found in
Christchurch, which also has a coastal climate, although situated on New Zealand’s east coast. As a
consequence of the assumed advection, the evaporation and condensation processes in the city will be
modified by drier air from rural areas. However, in the rural areas, advection is of minor importance for
evaporation/condensation.
Case 1 is characterised by decreasing vapour pressure at both sites (24% of the nights). Case 1 has the
highest initial humidity level and according to the nonlinear relationship between temperature and
saturation vapour pressure, also has the best prerequisite for a great and rapid decrease of vapour
pressure during the night. The decrease is interpreted as a condensation process, which indicates an
addition of energy at both the rural and urban sites. As a result of the differences in start time and rate
of changes the urban gain of energy is smaller than the rural. The decrease in the urban layer might be
the result of dewfall, especially on the rooftops, but advection of dry rural air could also reduce the
vapour pressure. The UME is caused by the time difference in vapour pressure decrease between the two
sites and the slower rate in the urban area. Both these effects are interpreted as a result of the UHI.
Nearly 50% of the analysed nights fell into the Case 2 category with decreasing vapour pressure at the
rural site and increasing vapour pressure in the city. This is the most frequent case, and also demonstrated
the highest mean UME (Figure 5, Table V). The rural decrease of vapour pressure is interpreted as a
Table V. Mean values of climatological variables at sunset (0) and 3 h (+3) and 6 h (+6) after sunset for Cases 1,
2 and 3
Climatology Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
(0 h) (0 h) (0 h) (+3 h) (+3 h) (+3 h) (+6 h) (+6 h) (+6 h)
Rural cloud cover 1.8 1.5 1.3 0.8 1.0 1.1 0.5 1.3 0.9
(octas)
Rural windspeed 1.6 1.1 1.5 0.7 0.3 0.9 0.3 0.3 1.1
(m s−1)
Urban windspeed 1.8 1.2 1.4 0.7 0.5 0.9 0.4 0.5 0.8
(m s−1)
Rural temperature 13.3 16.9 16.7 10.3 12.3 12.7 7.8 10.2 10.5
(°C)
Urban temperature 15.4 19.0 17.9 12.5 15.3 14.4 10.1 13.0 11.5
(°C)
DTu−r (°C) 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.2 3.0 1.7 2.3 2.8 1.0
Rural vapour 10.4 9.1 7.8 10.0 9.0 7.8 8.8 8.2 8.7
pressure (hPa)
Urban vapour 11.9 11.1 7.9 12.0 12.1 9.2 10.8 11.8 9.8
pressure (hPa)
Deu−r (hPa) 1.5 2.0 0.1 2.0 3.1 1.4 2.0 3.6 1.1
result of less or no evaporation, effective diffusion in the afternoon and stabilised air with reduced vertical
dispersion and dewfall in the evening and during the night. The effect of these processes would be a
continuous decrease of vapour pressure, although the vapour flux changes direction from upward to
downward. The interpretation of the urban data is that evaporation continues during the afternoon and
early evening, which in combination with air stabilisation results in an increase of vapour pressure. Case
2 implies a gain of latent heat at the rural site as a result of condensation and a loss of energy in the city
by evaporation. Case 2 corresponds to the ‘average’ conditions observed during field observations in
Göteborg. Holmer et al. (‘Differences in hoarfrost and dew fall between urban and suburban areas’,
manuscript submitted for publication) demonstrated that the average rural dewfall during anticyclonic
summer nights was 20 – 50 g m − 2, while dewfall in the city was observed only occasionally, and then only
on rooftops.
In Case 3 (29% of the nights) the vapour pressure increased at both sites, implying an evaporation
process and loss of latent heat at both the rural and urban sites. The positive Deu − r is interpreted as an
effect of greater evaporation in the city. Case 3 represents the driest conditions among the three cases, and
compared to the other two cases, condensation and dewfall during a Case 3 condition would require the
greatest reduction of the surface temperature. Case 3 thus has good initial conditions for a continued
nocturnal evaporation.
3.4. Discussion
The results presented by Tapper (1990) imply that conditions with downward vapour flux are twice as
common as conditions with upward flux of moisture, which in turn indicate a predominance of
condensation at both the urban and rural sites, which corresponds to Case 1 in the present data. The
Göteborg data, however, indicated a different proportion between condensation and evaporation at the
two sites. Conditions favouring condensation occurred on 70% of the nights at the rural site, but at the
urban site conditions favouring evaporation predominated on 76% of the nights. As shown above, half of
the nights in the analysis were interpreted as rural condensation and urban evaporation, which corre-
sponds to the conditions reported by Hage (1975). However, other conditions have been reported in the
literature. Chandler (1967) noticed that when the urban vapour surplus was observed in Leicester, it was
not associated with rural dew. The conditions reported by Chandler (1967) correspond to the present Case
3.
Evapotranspiration is, however, not the only vapour source in urban areas. Anthropogenic emission of
vapour is also included. Water vapour from car exhausts may contribute to evening increases as in Cases
2 and 3. Domestic heating and gas consumption is, however, negligible because summer data is used.
Advection of dry rural air enhances the vapour pressure decrease in Case 1. However in Cases 2 and 3
there is a dilution of evaporated urban water, giving a lower observed rate.
In the following two sections the radiative and latent heat flux effect of the differences in water vapour
will be considered.
3.5. Calculations of the radiati6e effect of the differences in water 6apour between rural and urban areas
The aim in this section is to illustrate the possible effect of UME on the net radiation and UHI.
Incoming long wave radiation emitted by the atmosphere L¡ in the absence of cloud depends upon
atmospheric temperature (T) and emissitivity (oa) in accordance with the Stefan–Boltzmann law:
L¡ = oa · s · T 4 (1)
where s is the Stefan – Boltzmann proportionality constant. The atmospheric emissivity (oa) depends on
the column of water vapour and its height distribution and also on the presence of other gases, especially
CO2, O3 and aerosols. The vapour content can be expressed as the column of preciptable water, which can
be recalculated to the optical depth using a pressure correction (Sellers, 1965). In the following calculation
of urban–rural incoming net radiation, differences based on data from Göteborg, the authors have used
a nonlinear fit of the tabulated values of the optical depth and oa presented by Sellers (1965) in order to
estimate oa. In the authors calculation, the urban mixing height was set at 90 m which was based on earlier
1002 URBAN HEAT ISLAND DEVELOPMENT
Figure 6. Calculated urban increase of L¡ in relation to UME. Calculation based on clear and calm summer nights. Tr =rural
temperature, OD = optical depth
measurements (Eliasson and Holmer, 1990; Haeger-Eugensson and Holmer, 1999). With an UME of 3
hPa, which corresponds to Case 2, this gives an urban column with an extra 0.2 mm of precipitable water
than in the rural column. If the rural preciptable water column is set at 20 mm, the pressure correction
will give an optical depth of 10 mm. With these input data Stefan–Boltzmann’s law gives an urban–rural
net radiation difference of about 2.5 W m − 2 in the range 10–20°C and if the air is drier (optical depth
5 mm) 4–4.5 W m − 2 (Figure 6). If UME is changed to 7 hPa, which is the highest observed UME in
Göteborg, the resulting downward radiative forcing is 5.5–6.5 and 9–11 W m − 2, respectively.
The importance of UME can be further illustrated starting with a condition where the radiation balance
(L*) is equal at the rural and urban sites. If an equal air and surface temperature is assumed,
Stefan–Boltzmann’s law gives the radiation balance of the incoming and outgoing longwave radiation
(L*):
L* = (oa −os) · s · T 4 (2)
i.e. L* depends on the difference between the surface (os) and atmospheric (oa) emissivities. The following
equation describes the equal rural and urban net radiation balance:
ar − osr) · s · T r =(oau −osu) · s · (Tr + UHIcrit) = L*

4 4
L*=(o
r u (3)
where indices r and u express rural and urban conditions, respectively. UHIcrit is defined as the intensity
of the UHI which will give L*r =L*u . An increased UME increases the urban atmospheric emissivity (oau)
while the urban surface emissivity (osu) is unchanged. The result is a decreased difference in emissivity and
then a forcing towards a changed net radiation balance. A simultaneous increase in the urban temperature
would, however, preserve the equal rural and urban radiation balance (L*). The UHI intensity necessary
to maintain this equilibrium is the UHIcrit.
The differences between the emissivity of the air and surface for rural and urban areas can be expressed
as:
Dor = ora −ors (4a)
Dou = oua − ous (4b)
Solving equation 2 for UHIcrit gives:
UHIcrit = Tr ·

Dor − 0.25
−1
(5)
Dou
Calculations under different assumptions were carried out to demonstrate the range of the critical UHI
during summer nights. The surface emissivity was put at 0.97 for both the rural and the urban area. Air
and surface temperatures were assumed to be equal. Calculations were performed for two different rural
temperatures (10 and 20°C) and two moisture levels (preciptable water 10 and 20 mm). The result
demonstrates an almost linear increase of the UHIcrit with increasing UME (Figure 7). The drier the air
(preciptable water), the higher the radiative forcing of UME and, albeit to a lesser degree, the colder the
rural air the more intensive the critical UHI. For the UME of 3 hPa the critical UHI is in the range
2.5–3.5°C and for the extreme UME of 7 hPa the UHIcrit range is 6–8°C. If the actual UHIB UHIcrit the
urban–rural net radiation difference enhances the UHI development. The opposite happens if the actual
UHI \ UHIcrit.
3.6. Discussion
The calculated effect of UME is not large but does have some forcing effect on the UHI. However, a
rather shallow urban layer is assumed in the calculation. An urban layer of 350 m (Tapper, 1990) will
more than triple the effect, which demonstrates that not only the UME, but also the thickness of the
urban layer is important. An urban increase of 3 W m − 2, as calculated above, corresponds to 12% of the
urban–rural difference in L¡ (about 25 W m − 2 see Table VI) and to 1% of the total L¡ which in the
urban area is about 300 W m − 2 (Tapper, 1984; Lindgren, 1997). Table VI gives a summary of some
studies of the urban – rural difference in incoming longwave radiation (DL¡u − r). However, none of these
authors considered the higher L¡ to be the result of increased urban vapour. In most of the studies
presented in Table VI the authors have not considered the influence of urban–rural humidity differences
on the incoming longwave radiation, i.e. they do not present any systematic analysis or measurements of
the humidity level. Oke and Fuggle (1972) report a +2 hPa urban–rural difference in Montreal, but they
found this difference insignificant as a quantitative estimation demonstrated that a 10 hPa urban–rural
difference is needed to develop an incoming long wave radiation of 20 W m − 2 (i.e. their measured value).
Aida and Yaji (1979) estimated the effect of the humidity profile to be about half of the real urban
downward flux increase. However these authors observed lower vapour pressure in downtown Tokyo
compared to the rural areas and thus their conclusion was that the urban decrease in vapour content
diminishes the urban increase of downward radiation (Aida and Yaji, 1979 p. 464).
The critical UHI demonstrates the influence of the net radiative forcing on UHI. If the actual UHI is
more intensive there must be some other input of energy which can compensate for the higher urban
radiation loss (for example anthropogenic or storage heat flux).
Figure 7. Influence of the UME on the critical Urban Heat Island (UHIcrit). Calculation based on clear and calm summer nights.
Tr = rural temperature, OD =optical depth
Copyright © 1999 Royal Meteorological Society
1004
Table VI. Results from some studies of the urban–rural difference in incoming longwave radiation (DL¡u−r)
Reference City latitude Type of study Conditions Maximum Most important factor Stated influence of Observed
DL¡u−r v.p. Deu−r
B2 hPa
B. HOLMER AND I. ELIASSON

Oke and Fuggle, Montreal, Car traverses, Met Summer clear 40 W m−2 Vertical temperature Minor
1972 45°N stations and calm nights UHI
Aida and Tokyo, 35°N Car traverses Winter clear and 26 W m−2 Difference in urban– ‘Half of the real −1.5 hPa
Yaji, 1979 calm nights rural temperature (and increase’ (drier city)
humidity) profiles
Kobayashi, Tokyo, 35°N Roof level, urban– Winter, clear Polluted atmosphere Minor
1982 suburban nights
Estournel et Toulouse, Urban–rural sites and Summer, cloud- 20 W m−2 Warmer urban
al., 1983 43°N models less nights atmosphere
Tapper, 1984 Christchurch, Urban–rural sites, Clear weather 30 W m−2 75% is accounted for 25% is due to urban
43°S vertical soundings summer nights by factors as air excess temperature
and prediction model pollution and humidity
Lindgren, Göteborg, Car traverses Summer, clear 17.4 W
1997 57°N and calm nights m−2
Data on the environmental conditions for the reported maximum DL¡u−r, the reported ‘most important factor governing DL¡u−r ’, any statement of the influence of vapour
pressure (v.p.) and the observed urban–rural difference in vapour pressure Deu−r is given in the Table.
Int. J. Climatol. 19: 989 – 1009 (1999)
3.7. Antropogenic emission of water 6apour by 6ehicles

Vehicle emissions might be a source of vapour, increasing the condensation during the night and also
contributing to the latent heat flux during conditions similar to Case 1 (Figure 5(a)). On the contrary,
during Cases 2 and 3 conditions, these emissions would increase the observed vapour pressure changes but
not influence the latent heat flux.
The following is an attempt to estimate the magnitude of the water vapour emissions by vehicles in
Göteborg. In 1996, the total vehicle km travelled in Göteborg were 2.38 × 109 km (personal communica-
tion H.E. Svensson, Traffic Office, Göteborg) giving 6.5 × 106 km each day on average. An average
emission of 180 g water vapour per km was calculated by data from Westerholm and Wijk (1996). If it
is assumed that the traffic is uniformly distributed over the built-up area (about 150 of the total 446 km2)
the average emission rate would be 0.36 g m − 2 h − 1. This, apparently, is not the case. Unfortunately more
detailed information of the distribution of the vehicle travelled km is not available from the Traffic Office.
Another problem is that most of the vapour emission in summer occurs during the day. Using data from
an intensively used street in the city centre it can be concluded that only 13% of the water vapour emission
by vehicles will take place during the night, producing a night time average of 0.05 g m − 2 h − 1. Even if
almost all traffic was concentrated in the central part of the UHI (about 18 km2) the nocturnal vapour
emission will be B 0.42 g m − 2 h − 1, which also is insignificant in relation to the observed evaporation/
condensation rates in the urban area (compare Figure 8(c)).
3.8. Calculations of latent heat flux—influence of ad6ection

As advection of dry air into the city is considered to have an influence on urban vapour pressure its
effect has been estimated. The advection in Göteborg is caused by the UHIC. The fissure valley landscape
in Göteborg channels the flow along three main valleys from the north, east and south while there is an
outflow of air towards the sea in the west (Eliasson and Holmer, 1990). A method for calculating the
advection in Göteborg has been developed by Haeger-Eugensson and Holmer (1999). They used the
following input data:
(i) Valley widths in Göteborg are 1000, 750 and 500 m, respectively.
(ii) In the rural valleys the mixing height is 50 m.
(iii) Wind speed of the flow is 0.5 m s − 1
(iv) The advected rural air is assumed to mix with the air in the central urban area which is 18× 106 m2.
(v) In the urban area the mixing height is 90 m.
The wind data and the mixing heights are based on earlier measurements (anemometer networks and
balloon soundings). Mixing height is defined as the layer below the inversion. Balloon soundings in
Göteborg have shown that the vertical temperature structure under the inversion is usually almost neutral
which implies a well mixed layer. For further details and a discussion on the method see Haeger-Eu-
gensson and Holmer (1999).
As the air is assumed to be well mixed both within the rural and urban area the observed surface
vapour pressure will be representative for the entire layer. In the authors calculations the urban–rural
difference in humidity was based on the nighttime averages presented above. The calculated advective
reduction of the urban humidity was added to the observed rate of change of the urban vapour pressure.
This sum was assumed to demonstrate the evaporation from or condensation on the urban surface. These
vapour pressure changes (hPa) were then recalculated to evaporation/condensation rates (g m − 2) and
latent energy fluxes (W m − 2). The evaporation/condensation rates and energy fluxes in the rural area
were calculated from the observed vapour pressure changes (Figure 8(a–d)).
The advective correction resulted in some important changes to the vapour pressure rates but the new
rates demonstrated a consistent pattern (Figure 8(a,b)). In Case 1, the corrected urban vapour pressure
rate was reduced to a third of the rural value instead of being nearly equal. However, the condensation
rates did not differ as much as the vapour pressure rates (Figure 8(c)), because the urban layer is almost
twice the depth of the rural layer. Because condensation in both areas is assumed for Case 1, the
urban–rural latent flux difference will be rather small, about −5 W m − 2 (Figure 8(d)).
Figure 8. Mean values of vapour pressure changes and latent heat fluxes for clear and calm summer nights during 1988 – 1990 and
1994: (a) observed vapour pressure changes; (b) vapour pressure changes corrected for advection; (c) evaporation/condensation rates
(corrected for advection); (d) latent heat fluxes (corrected for advection)
In Case 2 the advective correction was, to a large extent, dependent on the large humidity difference
(night time average 3 hPa) of the two areas. This drying effect, added to the observed vapour pressure
rate, implies that urban evaporation must be very intensive (Figure 8(c)). As a result of rural condensation
the urban–rural latent heat flux difference will increase, − 25 W m − 2 (Figure 8(d)).
The corrected vapour pressure rates in Case 3 were a little smaller than in Case 2 (Figure 8(b)). As a
result of evaporation in the rural area the urban–rural latent heat flux difference for Case 3 will be only
− 15 W m − 2 (Figure 8(d)).
3.8.1. Irrigation during the dry summer 1994. In July 1994, 0.4×106 m3 extra water was delivered
from the Water Works. If it is assumed that all this water was used for irrigation, the average
irrigation rate in July was 1 g m − 2 h − 1 over the entire area of the Göteborg municipality. However, if
the irrigation was concentrated in the built-up areas the rate increases to 3 g m − 2 h − 1, i.e. about 10%
of the nighttime urban evaporation calculated in Cases 2 and 3. The calculation is made assuming an
equal irrigation both day and night. In practise, much of the irrigation was carried out after working
hours, so in reality, more of the irrigation water was added during the evening and evaporated during
the night in the urban area. However, lack of more detailed data makes it too speculative to further
analyse what part of the increased UME during the dry summer depended on irrigation.
3.8.2. Discussion. The analysis demonstrated that the role of advection was to modify the rates of
vapour change, but evaporation and condensation are the most important processes for the develop-
ment of urban–rural vapour pressure differences. As a result of the fact that there is increasing vapour
pressure in the urban area, and decreasing vapour pressure in the rural area, the urban–rural differ-
ence in latent heat flux was largest in Case 2. As a result, the advective influence is also largest in
Case 2. The calculated evaporation in Case 3 is not higher than in Case 2. These results indicate an
upper limit of an evaporation heat flux of 20–25 W m − 2 in the city during clear and calm nights in
Göteborg.
No observations of dew were made in connection with this study. However, Holmer et al. (‘Differ-
ences in hoarfrost and dew fall between urban and suburban areas’, manuscript submitted for publica-
tion) demonstrated that during anticyclonic nights, dewfall of 20–50 g m − 2 was often found outside
Göteborg while no dew was observed in the city centre (Case 2). The observed values fit well with
those calculated in this study.
The results indicate that UME has a negative influence on the UHI which was largest for Case 2
and weakest for Case 1. However, this is neither evident from Figure 5, nor were the average mean
intensities of UHI of Cases 1, 2 and 3 statistically different (Tables IV and V). One explanation to this
is that the calculation of the latent heat flux was based on equal weather conditions and that the
advective contribution was equal for all cases. The statistical climatological test for the data from the
51 nights demonstrates that the rural wind speed is significantly different for the three cases (Tables IV
and V). This is probably of great importance for the transport of energy and the observed intensities
of the UHI. Another important point is that the urban–rural energy balance consists of several fluxes.
Especially DQS (the storage heat flux) seems to be important during the summer and DQS depends very
much on the weather conditions during the day before the night with clear and calm weather.
However, because nocturnal net radiation balances are only about 50–100 W m − 2 (see for example
Oke (1987)) urban – rural differences in latent heat flux of 20–25 W m − 2 could not be overlooked
when attempting to understand the development of the UHI.
4. CONCLUSIONS
The following conclusions are made from the analyses and discussion presented above:
(i) Reduced precipitation during a hot summer results in a large UME.
(ii) The maximum UHI precedes the maximum UME by 1–5 h.
(iii) The UME could develop from three different combinations of rural and urban nocturnal vapour
pressure changes, which implies that the relationship between the physical processes involved are
different.
(iv) The influence of the UME on the downward longwave radiation was calculated to about 3 W m – 2
or 12% of the urban – rural radiation difference, giving a weak enhancing effect of the UME on the
UHI.
(v) Evaporation and condensation is important for the development of UME but advection of dry air
by the UHIC modifies the values.
(vi) After correction of the advective effect on the urban vapour pressure change the urban–rural
difference in the latent heat flux was − 5, − 25 and 15 W m − 2 for the three cases, respectively. This
indicates that UME also has a considerable negative feedback on UHI development.
(vii) The magnitude of the latent heat fluxes are high compared to the net radiation balances.
The study thus demonstrates that urban – rural differences in humidity have an important influence on the
urban–heat island energy balance. The results confirm that the UME has a radiative forcing which
increases the UHI. Alternatively, the UME has a more pronounced influence on the latent vapour fluxes
counteracting the development of UHI.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors are grateful to Professor Sven Lindqvist, Dr Deliang Chen and Dr Manuel Nunez for their
valuable comments on the manuscript. The authors are also grateful for the comments from an
anonymous referee. Solveig Svensson drew the map and the linguistic revision of the manuscript was done
by Susan Cornell.
REFERENCES
Ackerman, B. 1971. ‘Moisture content of city and country air’, Pre-prints Conf. on Air Pollution Meteorology. Raleigh, Am.
Meteorol. Soc., 154–158 pp.
Ackerman, B. 1987. ‘Climatology of Chicago Area urban – rural differences in humidity’, J. Clim. Appl. Meteorol., 26, 427 – 430.
Adebayo, Y.R. 1991. ‘Day-time effects of urbanization on relative humidity and vapour pressure in a tropical city’, Theor. Appl.
Climatol., 43, 17 – 30.
Aida, M. and Yaji, M. 1979. ‘Observations of atmoshperic downward radiation in the Tokyo area’, Boundary Layer Meteorol., 16,
453 – 465.
Alexandersson, H., Karlström, C. and Larsson-McCann, S. 1991. ‘Temperature and precipitation in Sweden 1961 – 90. Reference
normals’, Swedish Meteorol. Hydrol. Inst. Meteorol., 81, 87.
Barlag, A.B. and Kuttler, W. 1990–1991, ’The significance of country breezes for urban planning‘, Energy Build., 15 – 16, 291 – 297.
Bornstein, R.D., Lorenzen, A. and Johnson, D. 1972. ‘Recent observations of urban effects on wind and temperatures in and around
New York city’, Preprints Conference on Urban En6ironment and Second Conference on Biometeorology, Philadelphia, Amer.
Meteorol. Soc., 28 –33.
Bründl, W., Mayer, H. and Baumgartner, A. 1986. Untersuchung des Einflusses 6on Bebauung und Bewuchs auf das Klima und die
lufthygienischen Verhältnisse in bayerischen Grossstädten. Stadtklima Bayern, Abschlussbericht zum Teilprogramm ‘Klimamessun-
gen München’, Lehrstuhl fur Bioklimatologie und Angewandte Meteorologie der Universität München, 346 pp.
Cerquetti, F. 1988. ‘Acquisition, checking and management of meteorological data’, Meteorol. Mag., 117, 341 – 346.
Chandler, T.J. 1967. ‘Absolute and relative humidities in towns’, Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 48, 394 – 399.
Eliasson, I. and Holmer, B. 1990. ‘Urban heat island circulation in Göteborg, Sweden’, Theor. Appl. Climatol., 42, 187 – 196.
Eliasson, I. 1993. Urban Climate Related to Street Geometry, Göteborg University, Dept. Phys. Geogr. Report GUNI 33, 6 papers.
Eliasson, I. 1994. ‘Urban–suburban–rural air temperature differences related to street geometry’, Phys. Geogr., 15(1), 1 – 22.
Emonds, H. 1954. Das Bonner Stadtklima, Bonn.
Estournel, C., Vehil, R., Guedalia, D., Fontan, J. and Druilhet, A. 1983. ‘Observations and modelling of downward radiative fluxes
(solar and infrared) in urban/rural areas’, J. Clim. Appl. Meteorol., 22, 134 – 142.
Goldreich, Y. and Surridge, A.D. 1988. ‘A case study of low level country breeze and inversion heights in the Johannesburg area’,
J. Climatol., 8, 55 –66.
Haeger-Eugensson, M. and Holmer, B. 1999. ‘Advection caused by the UHIC as a regulating factor on the nocturnal UHI’, Int. J.
Climatol., 19, 975 –988.
Hage, K.D. 1975. ‘Urban–rural humidity differences’, J. Appl. Meteorol., 14, 1277 – 1283.
Holmer, B. 1978. Göteborgs 6indklimat. (English summary: Wind climate in Göteborg), Göteborg University, Dept. Phys. Geogr.
Report GUNI 11, 225 pp.
Holmer, B. 1992. ‘A simple operative method for determination of sky view-factors in complex urban canyons from fish-eye
photographs’, Meteorologische Zeitschrift N.F., 1, 236–239.
Jáuregui, E. and Tejeda, A. 1997. ‘Urban–rural humidity contrasts in Mexico City’, Int. J. Climatol., 17, 187 – 196.
Kobayashi, M. 1982. ‘Influence of urbanized atmosphere on longwave radiation field at night’, Georg. Re6. Jpn., 55 – 56, 421 – 444
(in Japanese with an English summary).
Kopec, R.J. 1973. ‘Daily spatial and secular variations of atmospheric humidity in a small city’, J. Appl. Meteor., 12, 639 – 648.
Lee, D.O. 1991. ‘Urban–rural humidity differences in London’, Int. J. Climatol., 11, 577 – 582.
Lindgren, J. 1997. Nocturnal Incoming Radiation in and Around Göteborg, Sweden. Dep. of Physical Geography, Earth Sciences
Centre, Göteborg University, B93, 47 pp.
Lindqvist, S. 1970. Bebyggelseklimatologiska studier. Meddelande från Lunds Universitets Geografiska institution, Avhandlingar
LXI (with English summary).
Nunez, M. and Oke, T.R. 1977. ‘The energy balance of an urban canyon’, J. Appl. Meteorol., 16, 11 – 19.
Oke, T.R. and Fuggle, R.F. 1972. ‘Comparison of urban/rural counter and net radiation at night’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol., 2,
290 – 308.
Oke, T.R. 1987. Boundary Layer Climates, Routledge, New York, 435 pp.
Okita, T. 1960. ‘Estimation of direction of air flow from observations of rime ice’, Meteorol. Soc. Jpn. J., 38, 207 – 209.
Okita, T. 1965. ‘Some chemical and meteorological measurements of air pollution in Asahikawa’, Int. J. Air Water Pollut., 9,
323 – 332.
Schreffler, J.H. 1978. ‘Detection of centripetal heat-island circulation from tower data in St. Louis’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol., 15,
229 – 242.
Schreffler, J.H. 1979. ‘Heat island convergence in St. Louis’, Boundary Layer Clim., 15, 229 – 242.
Sellers, W.D. 1965. Physical Climatology. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 272 pp.
Sundborg, A, . 1951. ‘Climatological studies in Uppsala’, Geographica, 22, 1 – 107.
Taesler, R. 1972. Klimatdata för S6erige, The Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI), 672 pp.
Tapper, N.J. 1984. ‘Prediction of the downward flux of atmospheric radiation in a polluted urban environment’, Aust. Met. Mag.,
32, 83 – 93.
Tapper, N.J. 1990. ‘Urban influences on boundary layer temperature and humidity: results from Christchurch, New Zealand’,
Atmos. En6., 24(B), 19–27.
Trewartha, G.T. 1981. The Earth’s Problem Climates, The University of Wisconsin Press, 371 pp.
Väder och Vatten 1988–1994. Meteorological data published monthly by the Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute
(SMHI).
Westerholm, R. and Wijk, A. 1996. Bila6gaser, en ö6ersikt, Naturvårdsverket, Rapport 4528, 55 pp.
Wong, K.K. and Dirks, R.A. 1978. ‘Mesoscale perturbations on airflow in the urban mixing layer’, J. Appl. Meteor., 17, 677 – 688.

410 FTP

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

410 FTP

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

410 FTP

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLIMATOLOGY

Int. J. Climatol. 19: 989–1009 (1999)

URBAN–RURAL VAPOUR PRESSURE DIFFERENCES AND THEIR

Recei6ed 4 May 1998

CCC 0899–8418/99/090989 – 21$17.50

1.2. The present study

(iv) A quantitative calculation of the radiative effects of Deu − r.

2.1. The study area

2.2. The climatic stations

2.3. Data analysis

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1. Diurnal 6ariations of Deu − r

Precipitation (mm) 1988 1989 1990 1994 1961–1990

May 12.7 10.9 11.6 11.3 10.9

Time period m.m. Deu−r t.a.s. m.m. DTu−r t.a.s.

1988–1990 1.4 5 4.5 0

URBAN HEAT ISLAND DEVELOPMENT

not identical at-

3.2. The relation between Deu − r and DTu − r

3.3. Nocturnal 6apour pressure trends

Time in Urban Rural De T urban T rural DT W urban W rural Cloud

Significance levels; * =10%, ** =5% ***= 1%.

ar − osr) · s · T r =(oau −osu) · s · (Tr + UHIcrit) = L*

B. HOLMER AND I. ELIASSON

3.7. Antropogenic emission of water 6apour by 6ehicles

3.8. Calculations of latent heat flux—influence of ad6ection

You might also like

Significance levels; * =10%, =5% *= 1%.