Climate of North American cities will shift hundreds of miles in one generation

Climate of North American cities will shift hundreds of miles in one generation
Under current high emissions the average urban dweller is going to have to drive more than 500 miles to the south to find a climate similar to their home city by 2080. Credit: Matthew Fitzpatrick/University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science

In one generation, the climate experienced in many North American cities is projected to change to that of locations hundreds of miles away—or to a new climate unlike any found in North America today.

A new study and interactive web application aim to help the public understand how will impact the lives of people who live in urban areas of the United States and Canada. These new climate analyses match the expected future climate in each city with the current climate of another location, providing a relatable picture of what is likely in store.

"Under current high emissions the average urban dweller is going to have to drive more than 500 miles to the south to find a climate like that expected in their home city by 2080," said study author Matt Fitzpatrick of the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science. "Not only is climate changing, but climates that don't presently exist in North America will be prevalent in a lot of urban areas."

The study found that by the 2080s, even if limits are placed on emissions, the climate of North American urban areas will feel substantially different, and in many cases completely unlike contemporary climates found anywhere in the western hemisphere north of the equator.

If emissions continue unabated throughout the 21st century, the climate of North American urban areas will become, on average, most like the contemporary climate of locations about 500 miles away and mainly to the south. In the eastern U.S., nearly all urban areas, including Boston, New York, and Philadelphia, will become most similar to contemporary climates to the south and southwest. Climates of most urban areas in the central and western U.S. will become most similar to contemporary climates found to the south or southeast.

"Within the lifetime of children living today, the climate of many regions is projected to change from the familiar to conditions unlike those experienced in the same place by their parents, grandparents, or perhaps any generation in millennia," said Fitzpatrick. "Many cities could experience climates with no modern equivalent in North America."

The climate of cities in the northeast will tend to feel more like the humid subtropical climates typical of parts of the Midwest or southeastern U.S. today—warmer and wetter in all seasons. For instance, unless we take action to mitigate emissions, Washington, D.C. will feel more like northern Mississippi. The climates of western cities are expected to become more like those of the desert Southwest or southern California—warmer in all seasons, with changes in the amount and seasonal distribution of precipitation. San Francisco's climate will resemble that of Los Angeles. New York will feel more like northern Arkansas.

Scientists analyzed 540 urban areas that encompassed approximately 250 million inhabitants in the United States and Canada. For each urban area, they mapped the similarity between that city's future climate expected by the 2080s and contemporary climate in the western hemisphere north of the equator using 12 measures of climate, including minimum and maximum temperature and precipitation during the four seasons.

The study also mapped climate differences under two trajectories: unmitigated emissions (RCP8.5), the scenario most in line with what might be expected given current policies and the speed of global action, and mitigated emissions (RCP4.5), which assumes policies are put in place to limit emissions, such as the Paris Agreement.

Climate-analog mapping is a statistical technique that matches the expected future climate at one location—your city of residence, for instance—with the current climate of another familiar location to provide a place-based understanding of climate change. Combining climate mapping with the interactive web application provides a powerful tool to communicate how climate change may impact the lives of a large portion of the population of the United States and Canada.

"We can use this technique to translate a future forecast into something we can better conceptualize and link to our own experiences," said Fitzpatrick. "It's my hope that people have that 'wow' moment, and it sinks in for the first time the scale of the changes we're expecting in a single generation."

Search the interactive map for your location at

The paper, "Contemporary climatic analogs for 540 North American urban areas in the late 21st century," by Matt Fitzpatrick of the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science and Robert Dunn of North Carolina State University, is published in Nature Communications on February 12.

Explore further

Slowing climate change could reverse drying in the subtropics

More information: "Contemporary climatic analogs for 540 North American urban areas in the late 21st century," , Nature Communications (2019). DOI: 10.1038/s41467-019-08540-3
Journal information: Nature Communications

Citation: Climate of North American cities will shift hundreds of miles in one generation (2019, February 12) retrieved 25 August 2019 from
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.

Feedback to editors

User comments

Feb 12, 2019
Impossible. Trump is gonna build a wall to keep out climate change.

And Mexico is going to pay for it.

Feb 12, 2019
These idiots couldn't predict the Sunrise!

Feb 12, 2019
More bullshit LIES from the AGW Cult and their PATHOLOGICAL "science".

Feb 12, 2019
the climate is shifting back to what is was during the Climate Optimums of the Roman and Medieval Periods.

It takes decades for grape vines to produce in commercial quantities. Decades of weather warmer than what is currently being experienced in areas of former grape cultivation (Scotland and other parts of Northern Europe). Add to the decades of growth necessary to produce in commercial quantities to the hundreds of years where is was warm enough for grape cultivation and you'll soon see that temperatures in excess of today was the "normal" climate condition for centuries. Northern Europe abandoned grape cultivation in ~1300 and it has remained too cold for commercial grape cultivation since that time.

Feb 12, 2019
So we're cooling then? We will all have to drive south to get an equivalent climate to today? Srsly? And in one gen? The climate had best get cracking. It would seem to me that if we are, indeed, going to burn up in 12 yrs per the Big Green Deal, that they'd want to put New DC somewhere in Northern ME, not Yazoo City. For warmistas this makes even less sense than usual. "Climate-analog mapping is a statistical technique that matches the expected future climate at one location..." I smell yet another warmista, wishful-thinking, GIGO computer sim.

Feb 12, 2019
"Okay now! Why aren't you kids in class right now?"

"No, rodkrap, your boo-boo doesn't count."

"What do you mean auntieoral? That Dopey Trump told you you that you needn't go too class?"

"What shotownfoot? Oh that's a new one! So he told you children that literacy & math, art & science are obsolete?
A waste of time from your video-games?. Your computers will take care of all that boring stuff?"

"annoyingmousie are you claiming that donniedolittle promised you "special needs" students will all be qualified as a team players for important jobs in President Ivanka's Administration?"

Feb 12, 2019
So we're cooling then? We will all have to drive south to get an equivalent climate to today? Srsly? And in one gen?
Yeah obviously they meant north (or maybe theyre confused?). I for one would welcome snow and slop-free winters.

Feb 12, 2019
@Ghost, I read it a couple times and that is indeed what they are saying. I guess their model isn't showing any heat therefore this will not gain much traction if the lemmings see the obvious. Move south when the southern tier is turning into the Sahara or something? They haven't made one correct prediction in 40 yrs although with the current solar minimum winding down, the coolistas of the 70s may be right for all the wrong reasons like these authors if we cool.

@rrwillsj, you going to join in with some facts or POV that might merit some discussion or just sit there and spout nonsense that looks like it may be insults (it is so poorly written it's hard to be sure). Short bus indeed. I have a dr in front of my name, and you? What, a laptop in mom's basement wearing your antifa scarf and a pussy hat while venting your TDS? We're all aquiver in the presence of your towering intellect or, in your case, the antimatter equivalent. It's real hard but try and stay on topic. K?

Feb 12, 2019
It reads poorly, but if you pay attention, it does say the right thing. While this is about urban areas, the ramifications for agriculture are scary. Urban areas can probably adjust (unless they are on a coastline...)
/me makes note to invest in AC companies.

But what do you do if you are a farmer who has the growing environment move rapidly away from your land? Maybe you can switch to another crop, but if the climate goes arid, you're kind of screwed. Agriculture will be very difficult under this kind of rapid change because you will not know where the climate at your location is going and it may take centuries to stabilize. This is the stuff of food shortages and famine. When combined with other effects, it will destabilize countries. I really don't wish to grow old in this sort of world.

Feb 12, 2019
Promises, promises.

Feb 12, 2019
@Carb. You worry way too much about stuff that isn't going to happen. Warming levelled off in '98. Fear the cold. Watch the sun.

Feb 12, 2019
The modeling assumes world wide increase in temperatures. Big assumption. How big a brain is required to estimate how far north one will have to move to remain in the same temperature band with increased warming. But how can a solar minimum with global cooling be discounted?

Feb 12, 2019
But how can a solar minimum with global cooling be discounted?

Because of pretty fundamental physics. The energy from the sun doesn't change much, even during a minimum. Remember, the change due to the Maunder Minimum was insufficient to explain the little ice age. Other factors were required for that. If we do have a minimum (and that's still a big if), the temperature might cool back to ~2010 levels (IIRC) and then start warming again. So we'd just get a short reprieve. That's probably included in the error bars of the paper (which I haven't read yet).

Feb 12, 2019
Animals are smart enough to move inland when flooding occurs. Humans spend $300 billion rebuilding a welfare craphole like New Orleans, just in time for the next flood. Morons.

Feb 12, 2019
Not sure this is the right direction or if there will be one. Build a city in he ocean? which ocean?

Feb 12, 2019
If we don't get some more sunspots sometime in the future it's going to be another ice age instead.

P.S. It was snowing in Maui on Monday.

Feb 12, 2019
Not my future; but my advice, change the way we build our infrastructure or .. well, you know

Feb 12, 2019
95% of the population of advanced countries will live in cities in 20 years. Don't rebuilt cities that are so old the infrastructure would cost trillions to fix. Build new cities in areas where natural global warming will have the least impacts.

Feb 13, 2019
Of course none of this has any connection to the real world. It's just another modeling exercise by computers based on guesses about CO2 and temperature. Actual measurements from meteorological station data show no such thing. You can check the data yourself at the U.S. Historical Climate Network (USHCN) website here:


Or view USHCN graphs of trends here:


Feb 13, 2019
Other factors will end the human race soon enough. No other species has been as destructive as humans to the planet. 'Climate change' or's not going to end well. Just wait and see.

Feb 13, 2019
Because of pretty fundamental physics

-Then how come there are actual physicists (not wannabes like yourself who want to educate us on 'fundamental physics') who have other opinions?

"The sunspot record and other, often more indirect, proxies of solar magnetism have invited comparison with records of climate. For several such records a significant correlation is indeed present. One of the most striking correlations was found between the air temperature above land masses in the northern hemisphere and the length of the sunspot cycle by Friis-Christensen and Lassen (1991)"

Feb 13, 2019
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Feb 13, 2019
Specifics, Doctor. Labels do not make arguments.

- Statement from Spock to McCoy in "I Mudd" Star Trek (TOS): Season 2, Episode 8

Put simply, you have to actually use that thing between your ears, not just accept the lies and false conclusions being fed to you by scumbags like antiporacle who make their living misleading others.

Antiporacle, the oozing slimeball, wrote, "More bullshit LIES from the AGW Cult and their PATHOLOGICAL 'science'." Hilarious! Anti is using worn-out, poorly-formed mislabels to argue for a complete falsehood in a pathetic attempt to serve his masters and hurt humanity. Anti, pathetic is thy name. You even fail as a professional liar! LMFAO!

Feb 13, 2019
Put simply, you have to actually use that thing between your ears, not just accept the lies and false conclusions being fed to you by scumbags like antiporacle who make their living misleading others.
HAWW...HEE...HEE... a professional liar! LMFAO!

The Mark ThomASS, Chicken Shit jackass brays again. This is the jackass who brayed that nasty BIG OIL did not want him to stop burning fossil fuels, which was destroying the world. So, jackass goes and buys a Tesla, and then boasts about how fantastic his WASTEFUL JOYRIDING was. He then BLATANTLY LIED, claiming that most of its electricity was not from fossil fuels.

Feb 13, 2019
Blah, blah, blah, what exactly has antigoracle ever done to slow Global Warming?

He has done nothing but waste electricity typing and uploading his nonsense, over and over and over.

What good have you done on this world? You are an oozing slimeball.

Feb 13, 2019
"A new study and interactive web application" in other words a computer game is now the tool of climate scientist. What happened to the scientific method? "Science is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe. The earliest roots of science can be traced to Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia in around 3500 to 3000 BCE." so the ancients were well aware of the scientific method but somehow in 2019 computer games now suffice for knowledge. Im sure the readers here can understand that what is being passed off as science in these climate models is in fact propaganda. NASA and NOAA constantly revise historic temperature records, especially the 1930's, to fit their models You can read that in the Climategate emails. The reality is we're entering a grand solar minimum and like the era called the little ice age we are cooling rapidly and record cold all over the world confirms that, at least we have fossil fuels

Feb 13, 2019
Gort Klatu, how much do you get paid to post that crap? Is it worth it?

Feb 13, 2019
The Mark ThomASS, Chicken Shit jackass brays again. Keep LYING and BRAYING at the heretics, you jackass...oh...and WASTEFUL JOYRIDING in that Tesla. That's how you'll save the world, you jackass.

Feb 13, 2019
Antiporacle, the puss-filled slimeball, oozes again. Keep LYING and SPREADING YOUR FILTH, you moron...oh...and WASTEFUL electricity user posting false comments about GLOBAL WARMING. That's how you'll save the world, you ASShole.

Is that easier for you? :-)

Feb 13, 2019
"Gort Klatu, how much do you get paid to post that crap? Is it worth it?"

Mark graduated from the university of CNN. Science isn't part of Marks repertoire although he denigrates anyone who fact checks the propaganda...Mark is an idiot...don't be like Mark.

@Gort - Yes, having encyclopedias that were printed prior to the age of fake science and data smoothing is an extremely valuable tool. So is knowing the error bars in Satellite altimetry and maintaining access to the worlds tidal gauges that are measured in situ. That coupled with understanding CO2 physics, heat transmission and absorption ( knowing how "transparency" works) and generally having a head on your shoulders will all draw a certain amount of hostility from the programmed drones.

Feb 13, 2019
annoyingmousie, like all the malfunct circuitry of the other denierbots? Are just too stupid to understand when they are being insulted.
jeebus, these Artificial Stupids are poorly coded by their incompetent programmers.

Ahhh, I'm being mean to all you perpetual juveniles?
Oh, you are prancing ponyboys when you are grossly insulting scientists & academics.
Up to denouncing them as criminal conspirators against your altright fairytails.

In full knowledge that they are not permitted by their Corporate & Institutional rules, to respond to even the nastiest of your insults.

When I aggressively stand up against you vermin?
Using your own agitprop tactics?
You fall down cowering in a ball, bleating piteously for your mommy ewes to rescue you from the mean old man!

Your flagrant hypocrisy just emphasizes your lack of moral character.

The answer of how to understand Anthropospecific Augmentation to Climate Change? Is to learn how your refrigerator works.

Feb 14, 2019
Aww, jeez, rr is back. Still nothing to add I see. Figured out the refrigeration cycle, didja? Bra-vo. Something us oldsters learned about in 6th grade science class. Hardly a model for the utterly chaotic system that governs weather a/o climate and one that completely defies modeling. Barnum was exactly right, there is a sucker born every minute and you warmistas are the biggest of them all. No arguments just rave at those who challenge the mythical "consensus". Bad news for you is that posters here are neither cowed nor enlightened by your ravings, just saddened by your demonstration of how low the basic understanding of science is falling as time progresses and how politics overrules logic. Gaslighting. It's real and you've been had. Sucker. Given your obvious limitations, you may want to look that up. It has nothing to do with combustion.

Sorry all. I'm through feeding the trolls. Sometimes shooting off a little ammo for no reason at all can be satisfying.

Feb 14, 2019
These idiots couldn't predict the Sunrise!

You must be one of those Moron Republicans who think that climate projections made for 2120 are weather forecasts for tomorrow.


Feb 14, 2019
"If we don't get some more sunspots sometime in the future it's going to be another ice age instead." - JaxMoron

Sunspot count down. Earth's temperature at record highs.

MAGAHATTER JaxMoron isn't smart enough to know the difference between up and down.

Feb 14, 2019
how do they fake the data , make a mess , have no idea


Feb 14, 2019
no evidence of GW , no temp change at tropopause , if its not waming there how is it going to ' ''backradiate'' [lol] ' ?


Feb 14, 2019
Overwhelming evidence of GW, only tools of the oil industry disagree.

Feb 15, 2019
From your paper (https://academic....9/208306 ):
After 1980, however, the Earth's temperature exhibits a remarkably steep rise, while the Sun's irradiance displays at the most a weak secular trend. Hence the Sun cannot be the dominant source of this latest temperature increase, with man-made greenhouse gases being the likely dominant alternative.

So, as GoO points out, changes due to GHGs currently dominate over solar changes. What about a Maunder Minimum? From GoO's paper, such an event would decrease solar irradiance by 2 to 4 w/m2. Because Earth is roughly a sphere and the sun only shines on 1 side, you need to divide that by 4 to see what we would experience on the surface - so .5 to 1 w/m2. The increase in GHGs has added ~2 w/m2. So, as GoO points out, if we stick to physics we won't be cooling much at all.

Feb 15, 2019
In fact, if we want to stick to the physics, we can see that in the long term a Maunder Minimum would have little effect on the global climate (http://www.cgd.uc...2013.pdf ). That's because such minimums are short lived events. Now, will we have such an event? The prediction of such an event is, AFAIK, still only based on curve fitting exercises, ie not on physics. So, sticking to physics, there doesn't seem to be much support for a Maunder Minimum.

Can a MM, by itself explain the LIA? No. As pointed out in https://www.swsc-...014.html , the timing is wrong and the strength is insufficient:
While the MM occurred within the much longer LIA period, the timing of the features are not suggestive of causation and should not, in isolation, be used as evidence of significant solar forcing of climate.

Feb 15, 2019
Overwhelming evidence of GW, only tools of the oil industry disagree.

The Mark ThomASS, brays again.
ThomASS isn't the sharpest tool in the shed, that's why he goes joyriding in his Tesla, WASTING electricity, most of which comes from fossil fuels.
Keep braying at the heretics and big oil, you jackass. That's how you'll save the world.

Feb 15, 2019
lets take a biased best guess and call it TRUTH , ,,


''in a future climate change scenario
43 experiment (RCP4.5) using, for the first time, a global coupled climate model ''

Feb 15, 2019
We have driven 40,000 miles in our two electric cars at NO COST for fuel. And since they are electric they needed no oil changes, transmission work, tune-ups, emissions checks, new drive or timing belts, injectors, cams and valves, and produce no toxic exhaust or noise or vibration.

The PV system paid back in three years by substituting electricity for gasoline.

The future got here a few years ago, but some folk had their heads stuck in "BENGHAZI!!".

Feb 15, 2019
We already have the technology to ignore polluting and deadly fossil fuels and Nukes.


Feb 18, 2019
Climate fruitcakes, anyone? This is confusing. Do I have to move south 500 miles to have it nice and freezing cold, or is the climate from 500 miles away going to move here so I only have it longer mosquito season and not so freezing cold? Since in my case climate would have to move up 1,500 miles to make it warm, I guess I'm fine. Yeah, sure climate change. Heck the "climate" here can dip 71 degrees within one day. Yep, it happened in April 3rd 1982. And get this I got hypothermia in a day that started at 75 degrees F. I'm staying put, climate fruitcakes, like the "famous" (joke) Al Gore can move where ever they heck they want.

Feb 18, 2019
Hey, how come others that have "not rated yet" have five stars and I only get one? Some robot rater does NOT like me? Was it my referring to the "famous" (joke) human the reason? Oh, I am soooooooo devastated. lol

Feb 18, 2019
Food for the solar deniers. The jury is still out in my mind but it is more compelling than the decades of GIGO modeling, the "adjusted" temps, the outright falsifying (see Met email affair [hide the decline!] snoosebaums's links, above, etc, etc) and govts who seem to crave more authority and are financing warmist research at a rate 10 to one or so to the energy companies whose authors are made scientific pariahs by an illiterate press. Not to mention their not having a single climate prediction come to pass for 30-40 years. By now we should have been baked or swimming several times over by now. Thus it appears to my skeptical eye that they are just trying to spook the herd into hasty action that overly paternal politicians are too happy to take. At least in this case we'll actually know in a couple years, none of this "you'll be sorry in 2120 if you don't pay me now" nonsense.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more