|
Post by Ratty on Oct 24, 2014 1:13:15 GMT
Change of scale .... to emphasize warmer temps?
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Oct 24, 2014 1:15:14 GMT
Change of scale .... to emphasize warmer temps? I know looking at that if I was in Europe I would be getting ready for a rather chilly winter.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Oct 24, 2014 1:15:18 GMT
Will have to watch that change of scale to see how fast that yellow disappears. The big blue in the Northern Hemisphere showed up very quickly.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Oct 24, 2014 1:16:25 GMT
Change of scale .... to emphasize warmer temps? I know looking at that if I was in Europe I would be getting ready for a rather chilly winter. Upper Midwest has had a run of good weather. The forecast now is potential now next week. It is realllly rare to have snow on Halloween where I live.
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Nov 5, 2014 16:53:37 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Nov 13, 2014 5:10:40 GMT
|
|
|
Post by scpg02 on Jan 1, 2015 17:44:24 GMT
this article is a couple of months old. not sure if it has already been posted. NASA Scientists Puzzled by Global Cooling on Land and SeaMonday, 06 Oct 2014 12:36 PM The deep ocean may not be hiding heat after all, raising new questions about why global warming appears to have slowed in recent years, said the US space agency Monday. Scientists have noticed that while greenhouse gases have continued to mount in the first part of the 21st century, global average surface air temperatures have stopped rising along with them, said NASA. Some studies have suggested that heat is being absorbed temporarily by the deep seas, and that this so-called global warming hiatus is a temporary trend. But latest data from satellite and direct ocean temperature measurements from 2005 to 2013 "found the ocean abyss below 1.24 miles (1,995 meters) has not warmed measurably," NASA said in a statement. The findings present a new puzzle to scientists, but co-author Josh Willis of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) said the reality of climate change is not being thrown into doubt. "The sea level is still rising," said Willis. "We're just trying to understand the nitty-gritty details." ~snip~ www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Science-US-climate-oceans/2014/10/06/id/598864/
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Jan 3, 2015 17:27:58 GMT
this article is a couple of months old. not sure if it has already been posted. NASA Scientists Puzzled by Global Cooling on Land and SeaMonday, 06 Oct 2014 12:36 PM The deep ocean may not be hiding heat after all, raising new questions about why global warming appears to have slowed in recent years, said the US space agency Monday. Scientists have noticed that while greenhouse gases have continued to mount in the first part of the 21st century, global average surface air temperatures have stopped rising along with them, said NASA. Some studies have suggested that heat is being absorbed temporarily by the deep seas, and that this so-called global warming hiatus is a temporary trend. But latest data from satellite and direct ocean temperature measurements from 2005 to 2013 "found the ocean abyss below 1.24 miles (1,995 meters) has not warmed measurably," NASA said in a statement. The findings present a new puzzle to scientists, but co-author Josh Willis of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) said the reality of climate change is not being thrown into doubt. "The sea level is still rising," said Willis. "We're just trying to understand the nitty-gritty details." ~snip~ www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Science-US-climate-oceans/2014/10/06/id/598864/Problem might be that Josh Willis does not work in the area of sea level rise. Josh was the guy that discovered the deep oceans were cooling until he was convinced such a finding was not consistent with sea level data so he threw out a lot of the cold measurements assuming the buoys must be leaking, of course a subsequent study on buoy leaking is still searching for where their work in that area went wrong and does not confirm that theory, no doubt they will publish their work when they find the errors.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 10, 2015 16:05:11 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 11, 2015 20:13:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by fatjohn1408 on Jan 13, 2015 17:00:00 GMT
Hey,
So I've been wondering what's the cause for the great pause... Well I have read here (http://congrexprojects.com/docs/12c20_docs2/2-grace_esa-clic_forsberg.pdf?sfvrsn=2) that ice melt on greenland and antartica happens at a rate of about 340 GT per year with a quite large uncertainty of 20 GT in Greenland and 50 GT in antartica. Here (http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/land-ice/) Nasa is claiming faster rates of a combined 405 GT.
Then there are the glaciers around the world for which I currently have a hard time to find a clear figure but the it should be around 400 GT as can be found here (http://www.usgs.gov/peer_review/docs/SAP_3.4.2_pr_draft.pdf)
Then there is also the sea ice which is subject to great debate so we will assume it is stable for this discussion.
So let's say ice is melting at about 750 GT/yr give or take a 100 GT. Everybody on board so far?
1) The heat of fusion of water is 334 J/g, this means to melt 100 GT you need 33.4 x 10^18 J 2) The mass of the atmosphere is about 5.15 x 10^18 kg 3) The specific heat of air is about 1 J/gK, this means that 33.4 x 10^18 J can heat 5.15 x 10^18 kg of air about 0.0065 degrees.
Now it is important to understand that this heat is subtracted out of the atmosphere every year again and again. So an error in the melt of 150 GT/yr above foreseen values in the climate models would negate a rise in atmospheric temperatures by 0.1 degree/decade. (that is if all heat is drawn from the atmosphere and not the oceans) I know this is not exactly hard core science but I was just wondering if this could be where the heat is going. Doesn't it make sense as well?
(Warning: Rampant speculation below)
Lets say tomorrow the atmosphere is all of a sudden 10 degrees warmer than today, ice melt would spike but after 150000 GT is molten the atmosphere would have cooled down again to the temperature it is today. You can not increase the delta in temperature between the ice and the air above it without increasing the heat transfer.
Could it therefore be that as the radiative forcing budget of the planet gets more and more out of whack, that we will only see minor temperature increases of the atmosphere but more and more areas on the planet's ice sheet start to melt? A lot more ice can melt a lot faster if there happens to be warm air above it which it can cool and then send of to non-icy areas (like a polar vortex to the continental US). Most of the ice on the planet hasn't even begun to be in touch with warm air (East-Antartica).
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jan 13, 2015 17:52:56 GMT
Antarctica is a magic continent - it can increase surrounding sea ice, have record breaking low temperatures and melt - all at the same time. Some of these figures some based on 'GRACE' satellites are speculative at best. However, the stasis due to latent heat of melting is an interesting theory. If it is true then the current temperature of 'the pause' cannot be exceeded until the ice has all gone. At current rates that is several centuries away.
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Jan 13, 2015 18:52:20 GMT
------A lot more ice can melt a lot faster if there happens to be warm air above it which it can cool and then send of to non-icy areas (like a polar vortex to the continental US)------
Is this a settled explanation for recent cold spells in the US?
That aside, energy transfer derived from changing the state of water is fascinating, i do not have a mathematical mind and numbers dance in front of my eyes so i can only applaud any effort to quantify the mechanics of the fluids of this planet!!
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Jan 13, 2015 19:04:59 GMT
I think your analysis is potentially correct however it assumes there is an imbalance.
What it highlights is that the metric missing from all climate models is total system heat capacity. God forbid if it were to enter the scene as it will be hard to establish and show fault.
In a sense there needs to be a weighting system in place for temperature calculations. The Antarctic may be ten times the weighting of the mid-latitudes and the tropic 5 times, land and sea some other weighting. The real point is that if the system were to be "measured" with this type of metric and scientific method were used replete with "quantified errors" I would be sure that the errors would dominated the changes observed and measuring systems would have even larger variation.
|
|
|
Post by douglavers on Jan 13, 2015 19:45:51 GMT
nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/S_stddev_timeseries.pngThe idea that Antarctic Ice is net melting is not credible. Sea Ice around Antarctica is at record levels for this time of year, for the 30 odd years for which satellite measurements are available. Virtually all of Antarctica stays permanently below freezing, except the Antarctic Peninsula. There might have been some minor melting in the latter area, but there is a suspicion that subsea geothermal activity might have been responsible. As for Greenland, it is all far below freezing at present. The number of Atlantic storms this year on the back of a very active jet stream suggests to me that exceptionally large amounts of snow would have accumulated. Meanwhile, the amount of snow the Scottish Mountains have received this year, together with an anomalously cold Atlantic, suggests to me that the Scottish glaciers may start to reform ..................
|
|