Global warming: Heat stress hits labour productivity

Feb 24, 2013
Indian villagers cross the dry bed of the Sabarmati River near Dholakuva village in Gandhinagar, on August 9, 2012. Heat stress from global warming may be having an impact on outdoor work productivity in hot regions like northern Australia, Southeast Asia and the southern United States, a study said Sunday.

Heat stress from global warming may be having an impact on outdoor work productivity in hot regions like northern Australia, Southeast Asia and the southern United States, a study said Sunday.

In recent decades, rising temperatures and higher humidity reduced labour capacity, on paper at least, by 10 percent during the hottest months, it says.

And by 2050, labour capacity—the ability to maintain efficiency in outdoor work—could fall by 20 percent, it warns.

Farmworkers, construction labourers and the military are among the sectors most exposed to hotter, steamier conditions.

The study, published in the journal Nature Climate Change, uses a computer model that simulates warming and a rise in humidity and their impact on strenuous outdoor activity.

The most vulnerable regions are the Arabian peninsula, the Indian sub-continent, Southeast Asia, northern Australia and the greater Caribbean region, including the lower Mississippi Valley, according to John Dunne of the US 's Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory.

The model assumes an increase in temperature of 0.8 degrees Celsius (1.44 ) and a rise of five percent in for 2010, compared with a benchmark, which comprises the average over a century to 1960.

It foresees warming of 1.4-1.7 C (2.5-3.0 F) and a humidity rise of 11 percent by 2050 compared to this benchmark.

For calculation purposes, it also assumes that in temperate regions, people work continuously, but in the hottest places, the working day is split between 80 percent work and 20 percent rest.

The authors point out that the models do not take into account several factors that could change the picture, such as technological change and fluctuations in .

Explore further: 'Shocking' underground water loss in US drought

More information: Paper DOI: 10.1038/nclimate1827. dx.doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1827

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Australia getting hotter and drier

Oct 02, 2007

A new climate change study in Australia predicted the country will be 5 degree Celsius hotter and 40-80 percent drier by the year 2070.

France has had hottest year since 1900

Dec 27, 2011

This year was the hottest in France since the start of the 20th century, Meteo France said Tuesday, with average national temperatures 1.5 degrees Celsius warmer than the norm.

Recommended for you

'Shocking' underground water loss in US drought

7 hours ago

A major drought across the western United States has sapped underground water resources, posing a greater threat to the water supply than previously understood, scientists said Thursday.

User comments : 23

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

FrankHerbertWhines
2.2 / 5 (13) Feb 24, 2013
" published in the journal Nature Climate Change"

LOL.....'nuff said
schwarz
2.7 / 5 (14) Feb 24, 2013
No, actually, you said more than enough, FHWhines. The world is a dumber, stupider place, every time your hand reaches for the keyboard.
FrankHerbertWhines
2.2 / 5 (13) Feb 24, 2013
15 years of no statistically discernible warming.....Schwarz..you are a moron.
schwarz
2.5 / 5 (13) Feb 24, 2013
Temperatures today are close to what they were 15 years ago, but with a much smaller polar ice cap. Ergo, for anyone who knows thermodynamics, the world is warmer.

And you are a blithering idiot who thinks himself smarter than the editors at Nature. Tell us, what have you accomplished besides infesting this site?
MikPetter
3.5 / 5 (11) Feb 24, 2013
Still warming.
Extract from "Global temperature evolution 1979–2010", Grant Foster and Stefan Rahmstorf 2011 Environ. Res. Lett. 6 044022 doi:10.1088/1748-9326/6/4/044022
"We analyze five prominent time series of global temperature (over land and ocean) for their common time interval since 1979: three surface temperature records (from NASA/GISS, NOAA/NCDC and HadCRU) and two lower-troposphere (LT) temperature records based on satellite microwave sensors (from RSS and UAH). All five series show consistent global warming trends ranging from 0.014 to 0.018 K yr−1....The adjusted data show warming at very similar rates to the unadjusted data, with smaller probable errors,and the warming rate is steady over the whole time interval. In all adjusted series, the two hottest years are 2009 and 2010."
ValeriaT
1.9 / 5 (9) Feb 24, 2013
Heat stress hits labour productivity
Why we have so much "duh" science?. The overemployment of recent era is the culprit here. It's not the general lack of potential research for social psychology, but the various taboo, which prohibit to research it ("chi-energy, telekinesis, etc."). Instead of it the psychologists waste their lives and the money of tax payers in self-confirmation of trivialities. Apparently neither psychologists are immune against global warming.
JedClampet
2.6 / 5 (10) Feb 24, 2013
If the ice is melting, including a lot of Greenland, this is a loss of cold that can easily be converted into degrees of temperature change unnoticed on our thermometres. Therefore, we have observable climate change as the extra heat is converted into the melting of the ice.

I expect that when the ice is gone we will see pragmatic escalation of heat world wide as our ice, as in old time refrigerators dependant upon a block of ice to keep the food cool, dissipates and the frig heats up.
JedClampet
3 / 5 (10) Feb 24, 2013
ValeriaT - I agree, in the discussions regarding climate change and the fact of global warming, because those that attempt to refute the actuality completely ignore the facts of simple science.

It is interesting to note, too, that a lot of the academics attempting to refute the fact of climate change and global warming are connected to some degree to the oil companies and/or to Frankensteinian conservative pseudo-think tanks and have removed themselves from protesting the fact of climate change happening to, now, trying to refute the causes of climate change. Some, however, remain lost in the idea that climate change, even by the conservative oil lovers, to a discussion regarding the true cause.
BobArmstrong
5 / 5 (4) Feb 24, 2013
Willfully criminally stupid .
freethinking
2.5 / 5 (11) Feb 24, 2013
Simple science shows that since the mass building of Windmills have started, climate change for the worse has occured. Don't believe me, just chart the number of windmills to the temperature charts given by the UN and Al Gore.

Rich powerful "environmentalist" companies including Al Gore know that windmills increase climate change, yet they continue to build them. They should be held accountable for all climate change they are inflicting. The charts don't lie, climate change is caused by Windmills.
ValeriaT
1.5 / 5 (8) Feb 24, 2013
The charts don't lie, climate change is caused by Windmills.
It's too simplistic interpretation, nevertheless some indicia for it exists (Texas droughts for example). Wind plants aren't so innocent, as they appear. They induce precipitation of atmospheric water, which prohibits its condensation into larger droplets, i.e. the rain. And they prohibit the mixing of surface layers of atmosphere, which results into higher ground temperatures, increased evaporation of water and decreased precipitation again.
freethinking
2.6 / 5 (10) Feb 24, 2013
Since the charts don't lie, if you believe in Man Made Climate Change, you should be outraged everytime a windmill is built. You should be outraged that Al Gore and others and promoting them.

They should be banned.
JedClampet
3 / 5 (6) Feb 24, 2013
Free thinking - yes and everyone who ate a pickle in 1874 has died! Please let`s not be so simplistic and adhere to some relevant scientific protocol!

JedClampet
3.1 / 5 (7) Feb 24, 2013
ValeriaT - I`m sute we`ll find some problems with wind farms. However, the size and the amount of wind farms are hardly enough to cause drought in Texas. I would only assume that drought in Texas is a natural occurring and not evidence of either wind farm causations nor of evidence of climate change; man made or otherwise.
Shootist
2.2 / 5 (10) Feb 24, 2013
ValeriaT - I`m sute we`ll find some problems with wind farms. However, the size and the amount of wind farms are hardly enough to cause drought in Texas. I would only assume that drought in Texas is a natural occurring and not evidence of either wind farm causations nor of evidence of climate change; man made or otherwise.


Wind farms only kill birds and bats. Nothing to see here, nothing important happening, move along.

JedClampet
3 / 5 (4) Feb 24, 2013
Shootist - the low frequency sound may be damaging to those living close. Yes, they do kill birds and bats but they do not, yet, compare to the amount of bird kills by the tar sands in Alberta.

Let`s nor diminish the value of birds and bats.
Steven_Anderson
2.4 / 5 (7) Feb 24, 2013
OH my so now when denying climate change doesn't work any longer, they are going to start blaming wind mills for causing it. A simple solution is to look into LFTR Reactors to provide a good percentage of the output along with Wind. Balanced together the three make a perfect solution that is doable with technology that could be ready in four years along with air carbon capture. I even have a way to pay for it all that any naysayers can shake a stick at. Nearly a free missing 6 trillion that is completely wasted. http://rawcell.co...axation/
kochevnik
1.8 / 5 (5) Feb 25, 2013
@freeOfThinking Simple science shows that since the mass building of Windmills have started, climate change for the worse has occured. Don't believe me, just chart the number of windmills to the temperature charts given by the UN and Al Gore.
Actually climate change correlates more strongly with the rise of violent video games and Mel Gibson's ranting
Shootist
2.1 / 5 (7) Feb 25, 2013
Shootist - the low frequency sound may be damaging to those living close. Yes, they do kill birds and bats but they do not, yet, compare to the amount of bird kills by the tar sands in Alberta.

Let`s nor diminish the value of birds and bats.


I've only been in close proximity to wind turbines on two or three occasions (near Edwards AFB). I can see how the infrasound might, possibly, perhaps, be an issue. But I don't want to spend any tax money to find out. Better to stop building the turbines in the first place. Nukes, coal, natural gas, petroleum, did I mention nukes, are far and away the better solution.

No diminishment here. I find all this eco crap mildly amusing, but ultimately self limiting and nihilistic (true believers hate themselves and in fact, hate all of humanity).
Steven_Anderson
1.7 / 5 (3) Feb 25, 2013
More birds and bats die early deaths from coal byproducts in atmosphere (not to mention every other species including humans) better off with Nukes is only partially right. You need new types of reactors fourth generation ones such as LFTR Nuclear Reactors. http://rawcell.co...rillion/
Sean_W
1 / 5 (6) Feb 25, 2013
Temperatures today are close to what they were 15 years ago, but with a much smaller polar ice cap. Ergo, for anyone who knows thermodynamics, the world is warmer.

And you are a blithering idiot who thinks himself smarter than the editors at Nature. Tell us, what have you accomplished besides infesting this site?


Heaven forfend I question the vaulted intellects of editors but the arctic ice was smaller at the end of last summer because of a rare but not unheard of cyclone which broke up much of the ice and pushed it south. This winter has seen a record for ice growth in volume and area. Antarctic ice has been increasing and warmists blame that on more moisture from global warming because warming means ice in the south and it means lose of ice in the north... except when it doesn't. It would be nice if warmists could get their stories straight before
calling others "blithering idiots".
schwarz
5 / 5 (3) Feb 25, 2013
"Heaven forfend I question the vaulted intellects of editors"

So you're posting here under multiple usernames?

"but the arctic ice was smaller at the end of last summer"

Arctic ice has been shrinking year after year over the last 15 years, not just last summer.

"Antarctic ice has been increasing and"

Bull. One part of Antarctica is seeing growing ice cover. But the continent has a whole has been losing ice, not regaining it.

You are either a blithering idiot or a lying sack of filth who likes to cherry pickl Either way, piss off.
Howhot
5 / 5 (2) Feb 25, 2013
Getting back to the original article;

In recent decades, rising temperatures and higher humidity reduced labour capacity, on paper at least, by 10 percent during the hottest months, it says. And by 2050, labour capacity—the ability to maintain efficiency in outdoor work—could fall by 20 percent, it warns.


Cause and effect seems to be very real in economic design. It's hotter, less work. More snow, less work. Less work and less productivity, less GDP and less economic input. In other words, global warming effects us all in spite of the moronic denial of the right wing.