D'abord pour info au lecteur non informé
cette wet bulb temperature est la température qu'atteindrait une parcelle d'air si on la refroidissait jusqu'à ce que la vapeur d'eau qu'elle contient commence à condenser.
On lit aussi ceci dans le corps de l'article
By the 2070s annual exposure to wet bulb temperatures of at least 32 °C may increase by a factor of five to ten (relative to 2020; 32 °C wet bulb temperatures are extremely rare in the 1985–2005 period) to around 750 million person days under RCP 8.5 and 250 million person days under RCP 4.5 (figures 3(b, c); see supplementary figure 4 for full exposure results). Under the RCP 8.5 scenario, in any given year during the 2070s we project that there is a greater than 33% chance of a wet bulb temperature above 34 °C occurring in at least one model grid cell, and a greater than 15% chance for a wet bulb temperature above 35 °C (supplementary figure 6). These extreme wet bulb temperatures are concentrated in small parts of India, China, and the Amazon (supplementary figure 5), but due to the high population densities in India and China, our results suggest multi-model mean annual exposure to wet bulb temperatures of 35 °C or higher to be approximately one million person-days by the 2070s under RCP 8.5.
On y lit aussi que 32°C (wet bulb) est à peu près le max qui permette encore d'avoir une activité physique quelconque. Ce n'est donc pas tout à fait anodin.
Et surtout
Autrement dit, dans les villes, ça ne serait pas triste !We also only consider heat stress at a 2° spatial resolution–the urban heat island and other localized climate effects could result in locally higher wet bulb temperatures than are represented by the grid cell-average.
-----
Envoyé par yves25 
? pas tant que ça. 
.
