2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2020.107947
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Tree cooling effects and human thermal comfort under contrasting species and sites

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
26
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 87 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
5
26
1
Order By: Relevance
“…al. [34] described average temperature differences of only 0.4-0.8 °C or 1.0-1.3 °C. However, Golden et.…”
Section: Cooling Of Air Temperature At 11 M Heightmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…al. [34] described average temperature differences of only 0.4-0.8 °C or 1.0-1.3 °C. However, Golden et.…”
Section: Cooling Of Air Temperature At 11 M Heightmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Evidence for the positive contribution trees make to society is extensive. Thermal comfort of urban areas can be improved as a result of the increased shelter, shading, and transpirational cooling provided by trees (Deak Sjöman et al., 2016; Moss et al., 2019; Rahman et al., 2020). The interception and storage of rainfall associated with trees alleviates flood events in areas with extensive canopy cover (Berland et al., 2017).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This effect might significantly affect the immediate environment. For example, the results of experimental studies showed that evaporative cooling alone contributes to an air temperature reduction up to 3° within the canopies (Rahman et al 2017b , 2020b ) and the canopy-to-air temperature difference depends on meteorological conditions, tree species and, urban site-specific characteristics (Meier and Scherer 2012 ). The cooling effect by transpiration depends to a large extent on stomatal conductance (Tan et al 2018 ) and our results are in agreement with measured values at midday on Tilia europaea in Sweden (0.1–0.2 mol m −2 s −1 ) (Konarska et al 2016 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%