Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've been a "weather geek" most of my life (I'm just north of 40) and one thing I've noticed is that often, Newark not only has the highest temperatures in the metro NY area, but sometimes during summer in the entire East Coast.
Today's incredible 108 degree reading is a prime example. Channel 7 News seems to wonder this question as well and tries to answer it in this video.
But I'm not fully "buying it", for the following reasons:
1) If it were simply "lower elevation than Central Park", I would think Central Park would also have lower nighttime lows than Newark (since both have pretty big "heat island" effects, CPK is probably more but it's also not as "right on top" of urbanization as Newark Airport is). Also if that were the case that LaGuardia should be just as warm, and it often isn't (at least in the daytime).
2) I've looked at record highs where Newark shared it with other area stations, and I notice that before the 1980s, it often was not consistently the warmest station. For example, on Central Park's own record high day of 106 degrees on July 9, 1936, Newark was "only" 103 (which is not the record high for the date even, as it was 104 there in 1993 when Central Park was "only" 100). Another good example is July 3, 1966. It was 103 in Central Park, an incredible 107 at LaGuardia (highest temperature ever in NY metro until Newark's 108 today) but "only" 105 in Newark (yes, that's still higher than Central Park was that day, but it seems lately Newark is often 4-5 degrees higher than any other weather station within 200 miles or more, it's often warmer than Washington, DC when no other nearby weather station is......for example hot as it was today the only other place that was over 105 was Baltimore 200 miles to the south!). Actually, today's previous "high for the date" of 101 in 1957 is another good one. It was also 101 in Central Park that day, not 4 or 5 degrees cooler.
I wonder if there's an equipment issue, or something quirky about the location since about 1980 or so to produce this anomoly and I'm surprised that if even local news notices this that the NWS hasn't questioned it. Thanks for any thoughts here.
It's because of all the asphalt in the Newark airport area. Not only do you have the airport runways, but you also have 12 lanes of the NJ Turnpike directly adjacent to the airport, plus routes 1/9 to the west. That's a lot of asphalt releasing heat! The temperature gauge at Central Park, although in a city, is still surrounded by mostly grass and trees inside the park which don't retain much heat. JFK and LGA are influenced by the water of the LI Sound and Atlantic ocean so they are usually at least a degree or 2 cooler.
Maybe also because Central Park is on a small island, and breezes from the water tend to cool things down? I'm just making this up/guessing, I really don't know.
Look at Newark, Or mainly, NE NJ as sorta the reverse L.A. You got mountains to the North and West. You have a low lying area. So the air sinks and heats up as it reaches Newark. And ur sorta away from the water unlike most of NYC. Those winds blowing out of the west creates a sorta Santa Anna affect that heats up areas like Essex county. Plus its like allot of urban areas, lots of buildings.
Yesterday, one of the TV news folks showed sidewalk/pavement temperature readings in Manhattan of over 130 degrees. Newark Airport consists of a HUGE amount of pavement, with no trees or vegetation to buffer the heat effect. It just seems logical that the huge expanse of pavement at the airport would most likely raise the already high air temperature at that facility.
Then, throw in the hot exhaust from planes, the heat from the huge number of vehicles on the adjoining Turnpike, Rt 1 & 9, and on the airport grounds, plus the heat exhausted from the airport's own A/C equipment, and you wind up with a gigantic reservoir of super-heated air.
And, since the prevailing winds at the airport are bringing in hot air from the West, rather than cooling air from Newark Bay, the build-up of heat at the airport is not dissipated. Put it all together and you wind up with "the perfect storm" for the hottest place in the region.
Look at Newark, Or mainly, NE NJ as sorta the reverse L.A. You got mountains to the North and West. You have a low lying area. So the air sinks and heats up as it reaches Newark. And ur sorta away from the water unlike most of NYC. Those winds blowing out of the west creates a sorta Santa Anna affect that heats up areas like Essex county. Plus its like allot of urban areas, lots of buildings.
Good point, but any ideas on what's different from say 40 years ago? Unlike LA, the population didn't greatly increase/expand, and it's not really more developed (except far away enough to not make a difference). I agree all these factors on their own make it warmer than the other stations, but it really wasn't that way until about 30 years ago.
Good point, but any ideas on what's different from say 40 years ago? Unlike LA, the population didn't greatly increase/expand, and it's not really more developed (except far away enough to not make a difference). I agree all these factors on their own make it warmer than the other stations, but it really wasn't that way until about 30 years ago.
Just a guess, but 40 years ago Newark Airport consisted of one relatively small terminal and they didn't have all those parking lots close by. Also there are so many more flights, more cars and way more people generating heat.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.