You’ve reached your free article limit
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Sign In or Create an Account.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here .
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey, you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Create Your Account
Please Enter Your Password
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:

As climate writers, my colleagues and I spend a lot of time telling readers that places are hot. The Arabian Peninsula? It’s hot. The Atlantic Ocean? It’s hot. The southern U.S. and northern Mexico? Hot and getting hotter.
But here’s a little secret: “Hot” doesn’t really mean … anything. The word is, of course, of critical importance when it comes to communicating that global temperatures are the highest they’ve been in 125,000 years because of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, or for public health officials to anticipate and prevent deaths when the environment reaches the point where human bodies start malfunctioning. But when you hear it’s “100 degrees out,” what does that really tell you?
Beyond that you’re a fellow member of the Fahrenheit cult, the answer is: not a lot. Humans can “probably avoid overheating” in temperatures of 115 degrees — but only if they’re in a dry room with 10 percent relative humidity, wearing “minimal” clothing, and not moving, The New York Times reports. On the other hand, you have a high chance of life-threatening heat stroke when it’s a mere 90 degrees out … if the humidity is at 95%. Then there are all the variables in between: if there’s a breeze, if you’re pregnant, if you’re standing in the shade or the sun, if you’re a child, if you’re running a 10K or if you’re napping on your couch in front of a swamp cooler.
In order to better specify how hot “hot” is, a number of different equations and techniques have been developed around the world. In general, this math takes into account two main variables: temperature (the one we all use, also known as “dry bulb” or “ambient air temperature,” which is typically measured five feet above the ground in the shade) and relative humidity (the percentage of air saturated with water vapor, also known as the ugly cousin of the trendier dew point; notably Canada’s heat index equivalent, the Humidex, is calculated from the dew point rather than the relative humidity).
In events like the already deadly heat dome over the southern United States and northern Mexico this week, you typically hear oohing and ahhing about the “heat index,” which is sometimes also called the “apparent temperature,” “feels like temperature,” “humiture,” or, in AccuWeather-speak, the “RealFeel® temperature.”
But what does that mean and how is it calculated?
The heat index roughly approximates how hot it “actually feels.”
This is different than the given temperature on the thermometer because the amount of humidity in the air affects how efficiently sweat evaporates from our skin and in turn keeps us cool. The more humidity there is, the less efficiently our bodies can cool themselves, and the hotter we feel; in contrast, when the air is dry, it’s easier for our bodies to keep cool. Regrettably, this indeed means that insufferable Arizonans who say “it’s a dry heat!” have a point.
The heat index, then, tells you an estimate of the temperature it would have to be for your body to be similarly stressed in “normal” humidity conditions of around 20%. In New Orleans this week, for example, the temperature on the thermometer isn’t expected to be above 100°F, but because the humidity is so high, the heat toll on the body will be as if it were actually 115°F out in normal humidity.
Importantly, the heat index number is calculated as if you were standing in the shade. If you’re exposed to the sun at all, the “feels like” is, of course, actually higher — potentially as many as 15 degrees higher. Someone standing in the New Orleans sun this week might more realistically feel like they’re in 130-degree heat.

Here’s the catch, though: The heat index is “purely theoretical since the index can’t be measured and is highly subjective,” as meteorologist Chris Robbins explains. The calculations are all made under the assumption that you are a 5’7”, 147-pound healthy white man wearing short sleeves and pants, and walking in the shade at the speed of 3.1 mph while a 6-mph wind gently ruffles your hair.
Wait, what?
I’m glad you asked.
In 1979, a physicist named R. G. Steadman published a two-part paper delightfully titled “The Assessment of Sultriness.” In it, he observed that though many approaches to measuring “sultriness,” or the combined effects of temperature and humidity, can be taken, “it is best assessed in terms of its physiological effect on humans.” He then set out, with obsessive precision, to do so.
Steadman came up with a list of approximately 19 variables that contribute to the overall “feels like” temperature, including the surface area of an average human (who is assumed to be 1.7 meters tall and weigh 67 kilograms); their clothing cover (84%) and those clothes’ resistance to heat transfer (the shirt and pants are assumed to be 20% fiber and 80% air); the person’s core temperature (a healthy 98.6°F) and sweat rate (normal); the effective wind speed (5 knots); the person’s activity level (typical walking speed); and a whole lot more.
Here’s an example of what just one of those many equations looked like:

Needless to say, Steadman’s equations and tables weren’t exactly legible for a normal person — and additionally they made a whole lot of assumptions about who a “normal person” was — but Steadman was clearly onto something. Describing how humidity and temperature affected the human body was, at the very least, interesting and useful. How, then, to make it easier?
In 1990, the National Weather Service’s Lans P. Rothfusz used multiple regression analysis to simplify Steadman’s equations into a single handy formula while at the same time acknowledging that to do so required relying on assumptions about the kind of body that was experiencing the heat and the conditions surrounding him. Rothfusz, for example, used Steadman’s now-outdated calculations for the build of an average American man, who as of 2023 is 5’9” and weighs 198 pounds. This is important because, as math educator Stan Brown notes in a blog post, if you’re heavier than the 147 pounds assumed in the traditional heat index equation, then your “personal heat index” will technically be slightly hotter.
Rothfusz’s new equation looked like this:
Heat index = -42.379 + 2.04901523T + 10.14333127R - 0.22475541TR - 6.83783x10-3T 2 - 5.481717x10-2R 2 + 1.22874x10-3T 2R + 8.5282x10-4TR2 - 1.99x10-6T 2R 2
So much easier, right?
If your eyes didn’t totally glaze over, it actually sort of is — in the equation, T stands for the dry bulb temperature (in degrees Fahrenheit) and R stands for the relative humidity, and all you have to do is plug those puppies into the formula to get your heat index number. Or not: There are lots of online calculators that make doing this math as straightforward as just typing in the two numbers.
Because Rothfusz used multiple regression analysis, the heat index that is regularly cited by the government and media has a margin of error of +/- 1.3°F relative to a slightly more accurate, albeit hypothetical, heat index. Also of note: There are a bunch of different methods of calculating the heat index, but Rothfusz’s is the one used by the NWS and the basis for its extreme heat alerts. The AccuWeather “RealFeel,” meanwhile, has its own variables that it takes into account and that give it slightly different numbers.
Midday Wednesday in New Orleans, for example, when the ambient air temperature was 98°F, the relative humidity was 47%, and the heat index hovered around 108.9°F, AccuWeather recorded a RealFeel of 111°F and a RealFeel Shade of 104°F.
You might also be wondering at this point, as I did, that if Steadman at one time factored out all these variables individually, wouldn’t it be possible to write a simple computer program that is capable of personalizing the “feel like” temperature so they are closer to your own physical specifications? The answer is yes, although as Randy Au writes in his excellent Substack post on the heat index equation, no one has seemingly actually done this yet. Math nerds, your moment is now.
Because we’re Americans, it is important that we use the weirdest possible measurements at all times. This is probably why the heat index is commonly cited by our government, media, and meteorologists when communicating how hot it is outside.
But it gets weirder. Unlike the heat index, though, the “wet-bulb globe temperature” (sometimes abbreviated “WBGT”) is specifically designed to understand “heat-related stress on the human body at work (or play) in direct sunlight,” NWS explains. In a sense, the wet-bulb globe temperature measures what we experience after we’ve been cooled by sweat.

The “bulb” we’re referring to here is the end of a mercury thermometer (not to be confused with a lightbulb or juvenile tulip). Natural wet-bulb temperature (which is slightly different from the WBGT, as I’ll explain in a moment) is measured by wrapping the bottom of a thermometer in a wet cloth and passing air over it. When the air is dry, it is by definition less saturated with water and therefore has more capacity for moisture. That means that under dry conditions, more water from the cloth around the bulb evaporates, which pulls more heat away from the bulb, dropping the temperature. This is the same reason why you feel cold when you get out of a shower or swimming pool. The drier the air, the colder the reading on the wet-bulb thermometer will be compared to the actual air temperature.
Wet bulb temperature - why & when is it used?www.youtube.com
If the air is humid, however, less water is able to evaporate from the wet cloth. When the relative humidity is at 100% — that is, the air is fully saturated with water — then the wet-bulb temperature and the normal dry-bulb temperature will be the same.
Because of this, the wet-bulb temperature is usually lower than the relative air temperature, which makes it a bit confusing when presented without context (a comfortable wet-bulb temperature at rest is around 70°F). Wet-bulb temperatures over just 80, though, can be very dangerous, especially for active people.
The WBGT is, like the heat index, an apparent temperature, or “feels like,” calculation; generally when you see wet-bulb temperatures being referred to, it is actually the WBGT that is being discussed. This is also the measurement that is preferred by the military, athletic organizations, road-race organizers, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration because it helps you understand how, well, survivable the weather is, especially if you are moving.
Our bodies regulate temperature by sweating to shed heat, but sweat stops working “once the wet-bulb temperature passes 95°F,” explains Popular Science. “That’s because, in order to maintain a normal internal temperature, your skin has to stay at 95°F degrees or below.” Exposure to wet-bulb temperatures over 95°F can be fatal within just six hours. On Wednesday, when I was doing my readings of New Orleans, the wet-bulb temperature was around 88.5°F.
The WBGT is helpful because it takes the natural wet-bulb temperature reading a step further by factoring in considerations not only of temperature and humidity, but also wind speed, sun angle, and solar radiation (basically cloud cover). Calculating the WBGT involves taking a weighted average of the ambient, wet-bulb, and globe temperature readings, which together cover all these variables.
That formula looks like:
Wet-bulb globe temperature = 0.7Tw + 0.2Tg + 0.1Td
Tw is the natural wet-bulb temperature, Tg is the globe thermometer temperature (which measures solar radiation), and Td is the dry bulb temperature. By taking into account the sun angle, cloud cover, and wind, the WBGT gives a more nuanced read of how it feels to be a body outside — but without getting into the weeds with 19 different difficult-to-calculate variables like, ahem, someone we won’t further call out here.
Thankfully, there’s a calculator for the WBGT formula, although don’t bother entering all the info if you don’t have to — the NWS reports it nationally, too.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
The Iran war has been a gift to the country’s vehicle, solar, and battery business.
This is Heatmap Daily, a weekday evening digest written by our executive editor.
Happy Monday and welcome back. For months now, we’ve been talking about how the U.S. and Israel’s war in Iran has been a boon for electric vehicles, clean energy, and (unfortunately) coal.
But today we got data that confirms: This clean energy export boom is not just a side story. It is one of the brighter spots in the overall Chinese economy, which remains the world’s second largest.
According to economic data released on Monday, China grew 4.5% during the summer quarter as compared to the quarter from a year earlier. That means the country will likely hit its growth target this year, albeit on the low end.
The country’s economic expansion wasn’t driven by domestic consumption, however. Consumer confidence remains low, and residential investment has yet to return after the property crash earlier this decade.
Instead, booming exports are now driving China’s economy. Exports were more than 36% higher in September than a year earlier, driven by chips, ships, electric vehicles, and solar panels and batteries. The country will likely record its biggest trade surplus ever this year.
Some of those categories are clearly flourishing thanks to the global AI boom — think chips and even batteries. But the preponderance of vehicle exports suggests surging oil prices aren’t hurting. Sales of ‘new energy vehicles,’ a category that includes 100% electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids, were up more than 13% on a year-over-year basis in September, according to the Chinese car manufacturer’s trade group. But exports of these vehicles are booming. Battery electric vehicles were up 130% last month compared to the same period in 2025, and plug-in hybrid exports were up more than 200%.
It’s interesting to consider how much the Chinese and U.S. economy are mirroring each other at this moment. Americans are dealing with a remarkable investment boom, which is buoying the labor market and stubbornly maintaining high inflationary pressure. China is struggling with deflation, and exports are its quickest path to growth. (Consumer sentiment in both countries, interestingly, seems to be in the doldrums, even though American consumers appear to be in much better shape.)
When thinking about what artificial intelligence could do for the United States over the next decade, some subject-matter prognosticators (and even some Anthropic employees) imagine a world of 4%, 5%, or even 7% GDP growth. Such a growth rate is difficult even to envision in the modern era, of course, and it seems like it could propel the U.S. economy to staggering prosperity.
I know better than to make a prediction about where we’re headed. But amateur economic commentators should keep China in mind, too: a country that dominates along many technological axes, but where the standard economic math of supply, demand, and consumer sentiment still holds. Except if the United States economy were to stumble, no exterior source of demand will come to our rescue.
Endurance Energy hoped its generator would run for a full year, but the team isn’t afraid of the “error” in “trial and error.”
About 300 miles off the Oregon coast, a mile beneath the ocean’s surface, a startup just drilled the world’s first subsea geothermal well. And for a grand total of exactly 8.7 seconds, its prototype power plant generated about 2 kilowatts of net power. It wasn’t quite the result the Seattle-based Endurance Energy was hoping for — the company’s goal was to run its 100-kilowatt generator for a full year. But it’s not nothing.
“We really proved with this mission that a geothermal well could be drilled and completed on the seafloor, and doing that within 21 months of the company existing I think is really a testament to our pace of progress,” Endurance CEO Andrew Redd told me.
A former SpaceX engineer — as so many climate tech founders seem to be — Redd appears quite comfortable with the rapid trial-and-error cycles that hard tech startups often demand. Or as he stated in the company’s press release, which provides a refreshingly frank account of what this first test did and didn’t accomplish, “We follow the adage ‘make it exist, then make it good.’”
Investors seem to be buying it. In June, the startup raised a $54 million Series A, led by Peter Thiel’s Founders Fund — Endurance’s second funding round in less than two years of existence. Still, the team certainly has their work cut out for them. The ocean is a notoriously difficult operating environment: Saltwater is corrosive and offshore infrastructure is difficult and expensive to build, maintain, and repair.
Indeed, Endurance spent the first 11 days of its three-week stint at sea debugging its drill, which the team had never operated underwater before. But with a vessel chartered and a locked-in deployment date, the company couldn’t afford to wait for everything to work out perfectly. “We were still working on that generator hours before it got on the seafloor,” Redd told me. He’s used to that sort of thing, though, comparing it to making final tweaks to rockets already sitting on the launchpad. “That’s kind of the name of the game,” he said.
The trial took place at Axial Seamount, an active underwater volcano and the only place in the world with a cluster of hydrothermal vents connected to shore by fiber optic cable, which allows the Endurance team to monitor and control its system in real time from Seattle. While this was the company’s fifth deep-sea mission, it was the team’s first attempt to actually drill their own well.
After lowering their drill about a mile below the surface, the team bored two holes and turned the second into a well about 2 inches wide, lining it with pipe and sealing it with cement. But after losing so much time to debugging, the team only managed to drill about 52 feet deep — far short of its original 200-foot target.
Water then flowed up the well at about 260 degrees Celsius (around 500 degrees Fahrenheit), but the narrow borehole proved too restrictive to deliver enough heat for the generator to operate. So the team pivoted, connecting the generator directly to a naturally flowing, hotter hydrothermal vent instead. The generator then ran for a total of 29 seconds, producing about 2 kilowatts of net power for 8.7 seconds. That represents the total electricity the turbine generated, minus the 7 to 8 kilowatts needed to run its supporting components, such as the refrigerant pump and other onboard equipment.
Then a software glitch triggered the onboard battery safety system, which shut down the plant. When the team tried to restart the system, the power cable feeding the refrigerant pump failed, leaving the pump unable to restart. That was the end of the road. The mission wrapped up after three weeks at sea, a far shorter run than the team had hoped.
“The success criteria would be if we had left with the generator still on the seafloor; that would have been an example of sustained net power, and we didn’t get there,” Redd told me. Instead, the team brought the system back to Endurance’s Seattle headquarters, where it’s fixing the software as well as refurbishing and upgrading the hardware — which includes changing how it builds and tests subsea cables — to prepare for another mission sometime this winter. This time, the goal will be to generate sustained power from a much deeper well.
The team will need to demonstrate progress soon to keep its next major milestone on track: a planned 2-megawatt deployment off the coast of Tonga by the end of 2027. The project aims to supply electricity directly to the Tongan grid, which today is heavily dependent on expensive, imported diesel. Redd expects subsea geothermal to be cost-competitive with that fuel in this first pilot.
Getting there, however, is a formidable engineering challenge. While it’s long been a subject of academic curiosity, no one prior to Endurance had ever drilled an offshore geothermal well before, meaning the team can’t simply transplant existing land-based technology to the seafloor. “Every component that you would use terrestrially now needs to be either modified or built completely from scratch,” Redd explained. “And so you multiply that across every component required to make these kinds of infrastructure projects happen, and it’s a lot of work.”
No kidding. But if Endurance can pull it off, Redd sees this resource as “the perfect energy source for the future.” A conference paper presented by the geoscience company Viridien last year estimates that offshore geothermal resources worldwide could yield about 6 terawatts of recoverable electric power — nearly twice the world’s current continuous electricity output.
“We can access terawatts of power. There’s no fuel. We can site next to extremely large cities around the Pacific. We have no surface presence,” Redd said, ticking off the advantages. Plus, the three necessary ingredients for a high-quality geothermal well — permeable rock, high heat, and water — are widely accessible offshore, he added. Eventually, he expects subsea geothermal to undercut natural gas in Endurance’s target markets: electricity grids, industrial facilities, and data centers across the Pacific Islands, the U.S. West Coast, and Northeast Asia, all of which sit along the undersea volcanic zone known as the “Ring of Fire.”
The way Redd sees it, advances in subsea technology pioneered by the offshore wind, oil, and gas industries have cleared much of the technological path to making underwater geothermal a viable clean energy resource. In his view, what’s been missing is simply the ambition to chase the opportunity in the private market. SpaceX, he said, really proved what’s possible for a scrappy startup to achieve.
“It is quite new at industrial scale for a small company with a bunch of fairly young people to go after something like this,” he told me. “Before SpaceX went to launch a rocket as a private company, no one thought you could get to orbit as a private company. And so that has really seeded this ambition.”
On Greenland’s deepsea mining ban, Indonesia floating nuclear, and a solar boom
Current conditions: Hurricane Trudy has weakened from its peak as a Category 2 storm but still threatens up to 8 inches of rain as it swirls off Baja California • A nor’easter is howling through the Mid-Atlantic this week, hammering the coast with winds of up to 70 miles per hour • A humid overcast has settled over Paris this week as French authorities struggle to regain control after protests over living costs gave way to anarchic riots.
At least 47 major data center projects have been delayed, withdrawn, or blocked so far this year, according to data the regulatory intelligence service RegLayer shared with the Financial Times — and that may be a “conservative estimate.” Just 35% of planned data centers are “credible,” analysts told the newspaper, as more than 1,000 communities across the United States now have restrictions on artificial intelligence infrastructure. The data comes as investors look increasingly jittery about AI following ChatGPT-maker OpenAI’s missing a key revenue metric this year.
Those findings stand in contrast with the numbers from our data service, Heatmap Pro. Based on our research, at least 107 projects faced cancellation so far this year, putting 2026 on track to beat last year, which saw 108 proposals nixed.
Unless you’re living off the grid and away from any social media (if so, I’m jealous), then you can probably surmise that not-in-my-backyard opposition prevails in many such cases against proposed data centers. That makes selling would-be neighbors on the projects critical. New polling by the advocacy group GoodPower found that a binding promise to protect local electricity rates boosts support for the projects upward by as much as 14 points. Such a pledge worked primarily on the 78% of voters who distrust data centers. Another potential winner: Pair a data center with renewables. At least 46% of respondents to the poll said their support would increase if a project were powered by renewables. The survey spoke to 2,610 registered voters last month and oversampled in states with at least 200 data centers completed: Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Virginia.
Greenland wants to find ways to exploit its mineral riches in hopes of generating enough income from industries other than fishing and tourism to eventually wean off subsidies from the governments of Denmark and the European Union. Earlier this month, as you may recall, the self-governing Danish island gave a project the green light. But the government in Nuuk doesn’t want miners harvesting metals from the seabed surrounding the Arctic island, which are fertile fishing grounds and could, in theory, lead to mineral production without meaningful infrastructure to create jobs for Greenlandic people. Last week, the Greenlandic Parliament adopted a resolution requiring the government to draft legislation banning deep-sea mining. All members present voted to approve the proposal, according to Sermitsiaq, a leading newspaper in Nuuk. The ban would, if adopted, last until the end of 2029, with the possibility of an extension for two years at a time.
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
Long before the race for small modular reactors kicked off, Russia launched a floating nuclear power station and sailed the vessel up to the Arctic to power a small town. Now, as you may recall, the state-owned Russian nuclear company Rosatom is making plans to build more floating nuclear plants, and it has a major nuclear newcomer nation as an offtaker. Last week, NucNet reported, Rosatom announced a deal with Indonesia’s state-owned PT Pembangkit Listrik Nuklir to supply electricity to northern Indonesia from at least two floating nuclear plants with a capacity of 200 megawatts each.

Over the past decade, small-scale and rooftop solar systems increased from 18,812 gigawatt-hours to 92,979 gigawatt-hours, an increase of over 394%. That’s according to a new analysis from the Energy Information Administration, which found that California, Arizona, Texas, Florida are the regions with the most abundant solar resources. Even though the state has worse solar resources in general, New York ranked fifth as a result of growing capacity. Still, the rate of growth in generation has slowed over the past three years. l
The Trump administration is pulling out all the stops for Alaskans who want to drill and transport fossil fuels, mine minerals, and log trees. Now he’s easing rules on hunters. A new final rule from the National Park Service has revived a hunting method the Biden administration banned in 2024: Baiting bears with doughnuts soaked in bacon grease. Hunters use the baits to lure bears to close range before shooting them. “Some hunters prefer to use strong-smelling, high-calorie foods like pastries, doughnuts, meat scraps or fish remains to lure bears from miles away,” The New York Times reported. “But some conservationists say the practice is unethical and risks making the bears accustomed to human food, which could endanger people.”