Okay the title is dumb. But there's a serious issue here. The climate alarmists have cynically harnessed the urban heat island effect when building their models. They have used data from urban and suburban areas world-wide in preference to data from rural areas, even though development in those areas -- more pavement, more roofs (esp. dark roofs),... -- has created warming effects unrelated to greenhouse gasses, then claimed this proves that greenhouse gas emissions are warming the Earth.
The Purdue paint, deployed widely on flat-roofed buildings, where no one will notice it, and in places where white is a good color choice, would diminish the urban heat island effect.
If there were honest scientists studying the effects of human activity on the earth's climate, rather than ideologues and the herd-animal type scientist who just runs the same direction everyone else is, because that's where the grants are, they'd be trying to tease out how much of our impact on the climate is due to greenhouse gasses, how much to the generation of soot which decreases the albedo of ice packs, how much to the aggregate urban heat island effect (and more diffuse versions of the same caused by other changes in land uses).
It might be that blunting the urban heat island effect would turn out to actually be what is needed, rather than "decarbonizing" the energy economy, but without honest science, or the natural experiment of lots of people using the Purdue paint, we won't know.
