Manhattan Island always cooler than outer-boroughs

[Thunder]

Temperatures for Manhattan island, at least this winter, seem to always be just a bit cooler than temps in Queens and Brooklyn.

could this be because Manhattan is surrounded by rivers, while Brooklyn has an ocean to the south and Queens has a very large bay and sound to the north?

basically, are the ocean temps keeping Queens and Brooklyn slightly warmer?

[tkmikkelsen]

When I lived in New York my office was in Madison NJ, which something like 25 miles inland from Manhattan. No matter time of year it was. I noticed that New York was always 3-4 fahrenheit warmer than Madison, NJ, at least according to the thermometer in my car. I always thought this was due to the metropolis effect where a city is always warmer, because of the activity and energy being burnt there, than the surrounding country side, but maybe you are right that the waters could have an effect.

[steve s]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_heat_island
The main cause of the urban heat island is modification of the land surface by urban development which uses materials which effectively retain heat. Waste heat generated by energy usage is a secondary contributor.


Steve S

[Foolmewunz]

I suppose it depends. I can't find a detailed temperature map for NYC - not like the one I get here in HK, at least.

http://www.hko.gov.hk/contente.htm

On that one, you can clearly see the variables. For NYC, IIRC, the temperature is usually given from Central Park (wasn't that castle structure in the middle of the park a weather observatory at one time?), and La Guardia. There's little river/ocean effect in Central Park, but La Guardia is certainly exposed to the elements. If you check out the HK map, you'll see a swing of 5 degrees C. That's a pretty large range (9 F).

The topography is much different from NYC, but the distances are similar. I think it's directly due to the Brooklyn readings being taken from, essentially, the waterside, which is where La Guardia is. If you took the Manhattan readings from Battery Park, I bet they'd be colder than from Central Park.



ETA: Oh, crud.... you're saying Manhattan readings are COLDER? Really? (I totally misconstrued your post, sorry.) I'd love to see some regional checkpoints and 24 hour data. Maybe the observatory in Central Park is elevated?

[sol invictus]

Temperatures for Manhattan island, at least this winter, seem to always be just a bit cooler than temps in Queens and Brooklyn.

could this be because Manhattan is surrounded by rivers, while Brooklyn has an ocean to the south and Queens has a very large bay and sound to the north?

basically, are the ocean temps keeping Queens and Brooklyn slightly warmer?

Your thread title says Manhattan is warmer; your post says it's colder.

Which is it?

[Foolmewunz]

Your thread title says Manhattan is warmer; your post says it's colder.

Which is it?

Oh,good. I'm not crazy. I couldn't figure why I was addressing the wrong "argument". It's the thread title.

[MattusMaximus]

Temperatures for Manhattan island, at least this winter, seem to always be just a bit cooler than temps in Queens and Brooklyn.

could this be because Manhattan is surrounded by rivers, while Brooklyn has an ocean to the south and Queens has a very large bay and sound to the north?

basically, are the ocean temps keeping Queens and Brooklyn slightly warmer?

That would stand to reason, assuming no other effects, due to the inherently high specific heat capacity of water. That's the reason why islands like Hawaii have such stable temperatures year round.

But I also notice you seem to be saying two different things in the thread title vs. the OP :confused:

[sol invictus]

That would stand to reason, assuming no other effects, due to the inherently high specific heat capacity of water. That's the reason why islands like Hawaii have such stable temperatures year round.

It would - except that neither Queens nor Brooklyn are surrounded by water, while Manhattan is. No part of Manhattan is far from either the Hudson (which is quite wide) or the East "River" (not so wide), while parts of both Queens and Brooklyn are relatively far from the nearest water. It's pretty unclear which is the most "watery".

Anyway I thought cities tended to be warmer than the surrounding countryside due to a combination of tall rock-like surfaces absorbing the sun's heat efficiently and heat generated by urban activity. Since Manhattan is much denser than any other burough, I'd expect it to be warmer.

[Foolmewunz]

It would - except that neither Queens nor Brooklyn are surrounded by water, while Manhattan is. No part of Manhattan is far from either the Hudson (which is quite wide) or the East "River" (not so wide), while parts of both Queens and Brooklyn are relatively far from the nearest water. It's pretty unclear which is the most "watery".

Anyway I thought cities tended to be warmer than the surrounding countryside due to a combination of tall rock-like surfaces absorbing the sun's heat efficiently and heat generated by urban activity. Since Manhattan is much denser than any other burough, I'd expect it to be warmer.

Well, the Manhattan readings are taken from the farthest point you can get from the East and Hudson Rivers - Central Park- probably about a mile (of densely packed buildings) to the rivers in each direction. The Queens temps are reported from La Guardia Airport which is right on the water (LI Sound). Not sure where the Brooklyn readings are taken from - there's a lot of "city" there, but also a lot of coastline.


Alternate theory: Thunder's not providing any actual historical data. Weather tends to move West to East and South to North in the metro area. Thunder may have been seeing the front edge of a cold front. If you find a Google weather site right now and click from Long Island to New Jersey you'll see the temps getting colder (34F to 31F). I assume there's a bit of a cold front coming through - plus the fact that you're getting farther away from all that water (warmer).

[Plutonium]

It would - except that neither Queens nor Brooklyn are surrounded by water, while Manhattan is. No part of Manhattan is far from either the Hudson (which is quite wide) or the East "River" (not so wide), while parts of both Queens and Brooklyn are relatively far from the nearest water. It's pretty unclear which is the most "watery".

Not quite the point. The Long Island boroughs are closer to the Atlantic Ocean, a huge body of water that helps to keep temperatures more moderate (milder in winter, cooler in summer). In comparison, the Hudson and East rivers are tiny streams, although they may have some moderating effects compared with, say, inland NJ. Also, they are flowing south from northern areas which are going to be colder, so that may also make them relatively cool rivers.

Anyway I thought cities tended to be warmer than the surrounding countryside due to a combination of tall rock-like surfaces absorbing the sun's heat efficiently and heat generated by urban activity. Since Manhattan is much denser than any other burough, I'd expect it to be warmer.

Yes, generally cities are warmer, mainly because of the cumulative effects of heated buildings, and heat coming from the subway and other sources. However, in places like Manhattan and Chicago with tall buildings set in a grid, wind tends to be concentrated along the straight streets, producing a wind chill factor that works against this.

[Thunder]

oops....I did title the OP wrong.

yes, Queens is always warmer than Manhattan by a few degrees.

but as far as the Hudson not moderating Manhattan's temps, I guess that would make sense considering its water flowing south from upstate, as opposed to the LI Sound that is ocean water.


does salinity effect water temps?

[Bell]

I guess Manhattan has a lot more air conditioners.

[sol invictus]

but as far as the Hudson not moderating Manhattan's temps, I guess that would make sense considering its water flowing south from upstate, as opposed to the LI Sound that is ocean water.

The Hudson doesn't just flow south - it's really a tidal estuary near NYC more than a river. It flows north there nearly as much as it flows south, and it's quite salty near Manhattan. The East "River" isn't a river at all, it's purely tidal.

[Bell]

Related: When I did the Circle Line tour around Manhattan Island in 2008, the guide told something about the sounds from the city being dampened by the Hudson, or something to that effect (I didn't quite catch it) and that you couldn't hear the sounds (or almost not) from the river.

Does this sound familiar and does anyone know exactly what this is? Thanks!