Ocean now cooling approximately 3X faster than it warmed in recent years
steve....@nuclear.com
750 meters of the world's oceans to be cooling since 2003. The
magnitude of the cooling is greater than the unforced variation
produced by any of the modern climate models. A post-acceptance copy of
the paper is available at
http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/~lyman/Pdf/heat_2006.pdf
Very truly,
Steve Schulin
http://www.nuclear.com
steve....@nuclear.com
Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:
> steve....@nuclear.com wrote:
> >
> > http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/~lyman/Pdf/heat_2006.pdf
>
> Chen, J.L., C.R. Wilson, B.D. Tapley, Satellite Gravity Measurements
> Confirm Accelerated Melting of Greenland Ice Sheet, Science, 2006 (in
> press).
>
> http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-08/uota-gil081006.php
>
> 239 km^2/y .54 mm/y from Greenland alone.
>
> http://cosmic.lifeform.org
Thanks for posting this. I saw a news article about that Chen et al
paper earlier today. Their findings tend to help explain why sea levels
haven't followed the ocean temperature since 2003.
If only those EU nation legislators had known that tiny amounts of soot
-- transported to Arctic and deposited on ice and snow -- had such
warming effect (as reported by Hansen and Nazarenko, and by Jacobson),
maybe they wouldn't have listened to the CO2 alarmists and adopted tax
preferences for diesel-powered cars (and maybe Greenland ice melt
wouldn't be on the rise). Millions of new cars on the road in Europe
are diesels instead of gasoline-powered because of the tax changes. The
albedo effect alone from soot deposited on NH ice and snow may account
for 25% of increase in global mean temperatures in recent decades,
according to H&N's modeling using the GISS GCM. That's soot from all
sources, BTW, not just the "do-gooder" diesel soot created by the folks
who agreed that doing _something_ was better than doing nothing.
I read a recent article by Veerabhadran Ramanathan ("Global Warming",
Bulletin of the American Academy, Spring 2006, pp. 36-38) which
reminded me of the "unintended consequences" of the do-gooder diesels.
Ramanathan has long been working on sorting out the climatic effect of
various particles in the atmosphere. He expressed concern that the
Asian atmosphere has become so polluted with "brown cloud" particles
that the monsoons might be at further risk if we curb the GHGs. I
should probably mention (out of self-defense against some blowhards
here who might infer otherwise) that I do not believe avoiding
speculative risk to monsoons in this regard to be a good reason to want
to keep emitting CO2.
But back to black carbon. In addition (to the 25% of global mean
temperature trend in recent decades due to albedo effect of soot
deposited on ice and snow), there's another mechanism by which
deposited soot can affect Greenland melt: by direct transfer of heat to
the snow or ice. I haven't seen any estimates of how much melt this
contributes.
si...@situ.com
<steve....@nuclear.com> wrote:
>
>
>Lyman et al. have had a paper recently accepted by GRL which shows top
>750 meters of the world's oceans to be cooling since 2003. The
>magnitude of the cooling is greater than the unforced variation
>produced by any of the modern climate models. A post-acceptance copy of
>the paper is available at
>http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/~lyman/Pdf/heat_2006.pdf
this paper is a good addition to the literature: figure one shoes the
decrease in heat content from 2003 to 2005 is about two or three times
the size of the error bars, about 3e22 J or about 1.5e22 J/yr
Mr. Elifritz pointed out the new GRACE data that show 260 km^3 Greenland
ice loss per year: this corresponds to approx 1e20 J/yr
The Levitus paper referred to in Lyman points out that the the only
climate component capable to absorbing or emitting such 1e22 J is
the ocean. Lyman calculates that the cooling he measures would
correspond to a net loss of 1 W/m^2 if all the heat escaped as radiation
I do not believe a radiative imbalance as the answer, rather i
suspect that a the missing head is being more efficiently transported
into the deep ocean (below 700m) that he does not sample.
i look forward to more of these studies
sidd
Eric Swanson
> gradual oceanic overturn that we are pretty sure will happen in a PETM
>like scenario. Oh ... great. That's just ... oh ... shit. Forget it.
One might also consider that the enhanced cycle of sea-ice also represents
a change in thermal energy, as the minimum extent is declining faster than
the maximum extent in the Arctic.
Or, the unusually strong hurricanes of 2004 and 2005 may have stired up more
cold water from the lower layers of the ocean. Note that the cooling in the
mid North Atlantic and Caribean, but the warm Gulf of Mexico.
Or, notice that there are cooler and warmer area in the South Pacific, but
that this is an area that has been rarely sampled in past years.
--
Eric Swanson --- E-mail address: e_swanson(at)skybest.com :-)
--------------------------------------------------------------
si...@situ.com
Thomas Lee Elifritz <cos...@lifeform.org> wrote:
snip--
>
>Chen, J.L., C.R. Wilson, B.D. Tapley, Satellite Gravity Measurements
>Confirm Accelerated Melting of Greenland Ice Sheet, Science, 2006 (in
>press).
>
>http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-08/uota-gil081006.php
>
>239 km^2/y .54 mm/y from Greenland alone.
it seems that the filtering that Chen et al use, have substantially
raised the estimate from Velicogna and Wahr
Chen etal :239km^3/yr +/-23 km^3/yr
Velicogna et al : 162 +/- 22 Km^3/yr
sidd
si...@situ.com
Eric Swanson <swa...@NoScrewingAround.net> wrote:
snip--
>
>One might also consider that the enhanced cycle of sea-ice also represents
>a change in thermal energy, as the minimum extent is declining faster than
>the maximum extent in the Arctic.
the direct heat of fusion for northern sea ice is 5e19 J
antarctic sea ice 3e21 J (Levitus et al)
Lyman estimate 1.5e22J/yr
>Or, the unusually strong hurricanes of 2004 and 2005 may have stired up more
>cold water from the lower layers of the ocean. Note that the cooling in the
>mid North Atlantic and Caribean, but the warm Gulf of Mexico.
i ought to mention that Levitus detected two such episodes of cooling
previously (on the order of 4.5 to 6 e22 J in the late sixties and
middle 80's for the top 700 m of ocean (Fig 1 of his paper)
sidd
Lloyd Parker
1. As the paper says, there's still overall warming.
2. If you look at global temp. plots, the temp. rises, but makes a kind of
saw-tooth pattern (kind of like a polaragraphic wave), so you can easily find
a small temporary downturn which doesn't change the overall rise.
ivars.fa...@gmail.com
from below , from core, via crust, under pressure?
A slighly warm gas; as it will enter ocean, it will cool but it will
anyway cause density to drop and begin convective motion of cold water
up.
Roger Coppock
Crazies Run the Asylum
news:1155300837.8...@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Gee, I wonder if all those hurricanes, typhoons and cyclones might have
lifted heat out of the oceans? Let's look at the math. One example lesson
previously published four different times here on the sci.environment
newsgroup might show something important...
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/4f4a244ef713eee2?hl=en&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/d033e61b803d47d8?hl=en&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/2551a96f152ab565?hl=en&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/32226ddc8f302453?hl=en&
Here's the math. It does not lie. It is incapable of lying.
The waters of the Gulf are about 28°C. The cloud tops of Rita
are about -70°C to -80°C. That is about 100 degrees difference
in a distance of about 12 kilometers. Each change of one degree
C to a CC of water, one gram of water, is one calorie. If we
knew how much water was being lifted by Rita we could figure out
how many calories of GLOBAL WARMING energy there are in those waters.
We can figure out how much water is being lifted. The National
Hurricane Center is taking constant measurements.
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/
Here's some raw data for figuring the math:
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/text/refresh/MIATCPAT3+shtml/220249.shtml
"... RITA IS MOVING TOWARD THE WEST NEAR 9 MPH ...15
KM/HR...AND THIS GENERAL MOTION AT A SLIGHTLY FASTER FORWARD
SPEED IS EXPECTED DURING THE NEXT 24 HOURS.
MAXIMUM SUSTAINED WINDS ARE NEAR 175 MPH...280 KM/HR...WITH HIGHER
GUSTS. RITA IS A POTENTIALLY CATASTROPHIC CATEGORY FIVE HURRICANE ON
THE SAFFIR-SIMPSON SCALE. SOME FLUCTUATIONS IN
INTENSITY ARE LIKELY DURING THE NEXT 24 HOURS.
HURRICANE FORCE WINDS EXTEND OUTWARD UP TO 70 MILES...110 KM... FROM
THE CENTER...AND TROPICAL STORM FORCE WINDS EXTEND OUTWARD UP TO 185
MILES...295 KM. ..."
HEAVY RAINS ASSOCIATED WITH RITA ARE FORECAST TO BEGIN TO AFFECT THE
WESTERN AND CENTRAL GULF OF MEXICO COASTAL AREAS THURSDAY NIGHT INTO
FRIDAY. RITA IS EXPECTED TO PRODUCE TOTAL RAINFALL ACCUMULATIONS OF 8
TO 12 INCHES WITH ISOLATED MAXIMUM AMOUNTS OF 15 INCHES OVER THE
CENTRAL TO UPPER TEXAS COAST. ..."
From this we can figure the speed covering a radius of the
hurricane-portion of the system.
9 mph forward motion, diameter of hurricane force winds is 140
miles, it takes 15.5 hours to traverse one storm diameter. The
rainfall in that peak area is 8" to 12" up to peak of 15"
maximum. Choosing the lowest number 8" of rainwater over 15.5
hours will give us some number we can use.
The area of a circle is Pi x R^2, = 15393.8 square miles.
8" of water = 20.32 cm.
15393.8 square miles = 398,697,600,000,000 sq. cm
398,697,600,000,000 sq. cm x 20.32 cm =
8,101,535,232,000,000,000 cubic centimeters = calories.
That's how many calories it takes to raise those CCs by each
degree.
8,101,535,232,000,000,000 = 9,422,085,000,000 kilowatt-hours
8,101,535,232,000,000,000 = 9,422,085,000 megawatt-hours
8,101,535,232,000,000,000 = 32,149,490,000,000,000 BTUs
8,101,535,232,000,000,000 = 33,919,510,000,000 megajoules
8,101,535,232,000,000,000 = 12,635,220,000,000 horspower-hours
This is not even counting the energy required to go from liquid
phase to gasous phase without any raise in temperature (600 cal
per gram, per CC).
You can multiply those numbers by about 700 (kilowatt-hours,
megawatt-hours, BTUs, megajoules, horsepower-hours) to see how
much heat is being extracted from the ocean and turned into
death.
This is what Global Warming is ALL about. It takes storms of
this power, this often, to barely keep up with the heat going
into the system, trapped under greenhouse gases, during this
part of summer. This is the third storm of catagory 4 or higher
in 23 days on either side of Mexico. Katrina barely cooled the
waters at all dissipating all that heat to the frigid heights of
-80C, and Rita is unlikely to dent the 300 foot deep hot water
reservoir of the Loop Current which gave it its big push to 175
mph wind force.
OCTOBER is when the big storms hit, traditionally. This is just
a PREVIEW.
======
Well, That was a PREDICTION. October brought Hurricane Wilma,
which poured 50 inches of rain on one western Cuba weather
station. Anybody want to do the math on Hurricane Wilma?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Wilma
Highest winds 185 mph (295 km/h)
Lowest pressure 882 mbar (hPa) (Lowest pressure ever recorded in an Atlantic hurricane)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclone_Monica
Highest winds 360 km/h (220 mph) (gusts)
290 km/h (180 mph) (10-minute sustained)
Lowest pressure 905 hPa (mbar) (official; measurement disputed)
Crazies Run the Asylum
news:ebig7u$9kk$1...@news04.infoave.net:
http://www-argo.ucsd.edu/
Argo is a global array of 3,000 free-drifting profiling floats that measures the temperature and salinity of the
upper 2000 m of the ocean. This allows, for the first time, continuous monitoring of the temperature, salinity,
and velocity of the upper ocean, with all data being relayed and made publicly available within hours after
collection.
Positions of the floats that have delivered data within the last 30 days (updated daily):
http://www-hrx.ucsd.edu/www-argo/status.jpg
Why do we need Argo?
We are increasingly concerned about global change and its regional impacts. Sea level is rising at an
accelerating rate of 3 mm/year, Arctic sea ice cover is shrinking and high latitude areas are warming rapidly.
Extreme weather events cause loss of life and enormous burdens on the insurance industry. Globally, 8 of
the 10 warmest years since 1860, when instrumental records began, were in the past decade.
These effects are caused by a mixture of long-term climate change and natural variability. Their impacts are
in some cases beneficial (lengthened growing seasons, opening of Arctic shipping routes) and in others
adverse (increased coastal flooding, severe droughts, more extreme and frequent heat waves and weather
events such as severe tropical cyclones).
Understanding (and eventually predicting) changes in both the atmosphere and ocean are needed to guide
international actions, to optimize governments’ policies and to shape industrial strategies. To make those
predictions we need improved models of climate and of the entire earth system (including socio-economic
factors).
Lack of sustained observations of the atmosphere, oceans and land have hindered the development and
validation of climate models. An example comes from a recent analysis which concluded that the currents
transporting heat northwards in the Atlantic and influencing western European climate had weakened by 30%
in the past decade. This result had to be based on just five research measurements spread over 40 years.
Was this change part of a trend that might lead to a major change in the Atlantic circulation, or due to
natural variability that will reverse in the future, or is it an artifact of the limited observations?
In 1999, to combat this lack of data, an innovative step was taken by scientists to greatly improve the
collection of observations inside the ocean through increased sampling of old and new quantities and
increased coverage in terms of time and area.
That step was Argo.
Argo animationargo.avi is a float animation that explains the purpose and method of Argo.
ftp://matuku.ucsd.edu/pub/argo/slides/argo.avi
Where is Argo now?
Argo deployments began in 2000 by the end of 2005 the array is over 75% complete. Today's tally of floats is
shown in the figure above. The Argo array should approach 3000 floats by the end of 2006, and can be
maintained at that level as long as national commitments provide about 800 floats per year. The need for
global Argo observations will continue indefinitely into the future, though the technologies and design of the
array will evolve as better instruments are built, models are improved, and more is learned about ocean
variability.
Who Collaborates with Argo?
Argo is a major contributor to the WCRP's Climate Variability and Predictability Experiment (CLIVAR) project
and to the Global Ocean Data Assimilation Experiment (GODAE). The Argo array is part of the Global Climate
Observing System/Global Ocean Observing System GCOS/ GOOS)
Crazies Run the Asylum
news:1155329070.0...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com:
> Will ocean top cool if CO2 or some other gas would be coming via it
> from below , from core, via crust, under pressure?
> A slighly warm gas; as it will enter ocean, it will cool but it will
> anyway cause density to drop and begin convective motion of cold water
> up.
That's not how the ocean works.
The sea surface is warmed by the sun. Warmer water rises. The lower depth loose heat by conduction,
convenction and radiative transfer. Cooler waters descend. You have a thermocline in the middle. Above the
thermocline the waters convect up, below the thermocline the do not, they try to sink. Gravity keeps these
two strata physically together as layers, with very little mixing between the two.
CO2 dissolves more readily into cooler waters and is ejected more readily from warmer waters. There is no
appreciable exchanges of CO2 across the broad ocean surfaces. CO2 only sinks at the downwelling currents
as the surfaces imping on the poles. Being heavier than water, CO2 in the benthic deeps has difficulty rising
above sea mounts and ridges. Some of it is sunk for literal eons.
Eric Swanson
says...
>
>In article <ebig7u$9kk$1...@news04.infoave.net>,
>Eric Swanson <swa...@NoScrewingAround.net> wrote:
>
>snip--
>>Or, the unusually strong hurricanes of 2004 and 2005 may have stired up more
>>cold water from the lower layers of the ocean. Note that the cooling in the
>>mid North Atlantic and Caribean, but the warm Gulf of Mexico.
>
>i ought to mention that Levitus detected two such episodes of cooling
>previously (on the order of 4.5 to 6 e22 J in the late sixties and
>middle 80's for the top 700 m of ocean (Fig 1 of his paper)
That period corresponds to the Great Salinity Anomaly in the North Atlantic
and an event which was similar in the 1980's. There is a thought that the
GSA type events represent some natural internal oscillation in the oceans,
perhaps coupled to the NAO. There is evidence that the THC sinking stopped in
the Greenland Sea about the same period as the GSA. Perhaps we are in another
GSA period. The cooling shown in Lyman's data for the Labrador Sea might point
to such an occurrence, as would the cold temperatures reported in Europe this
past winter. Levitus also notes that there is a cooling in the Indian Ocean,
which may be linked to Asian aerosols, which may also impact the western
Pacific downwind of China. China's rapid industrialization has led to the
building of many coal fired electric generating plants, while there is also a
rapid increase in the number of automobiles. In any event, the cooling which
Lyman reports may be a short term situation, with the long term trend returning
to warming in a few years.
ivars.fa...@gmail.com
See the link
http://www.ia.ucsb.edu/pa/display.aspx?pkey=1482
Gas Escaping From Ocean Floor May Drive Global Warming
July 19, 2006
(Santa Barbara, Calif.) - Gas escaping from the ocean floor may
provide some answers to understanding historical global warming cycles
and provide information on current climate changes, according to a team
of scientists at the University of California, Santa Barbara. The
findings are reported in the July 20 on-line version of the scientific
journal, Global Biogeochemical Cycles.
Remarkable and unexpected support for this idea occurred when divers
and scientists from UC Santa Barbara observed and videotaped a massive
blowout of methane from the ocean floor. It happened in an area of gas
and oil seepage coming out of small volcanoes in the ocean floor of the
Santa Barbara channel -- called Shane Seep -- near an area
known as the Coal Oil Point seep field. The blowout sounded like a
freight train, according to the divers.
Atmospheric methane is at least 20 times more potent than carbon
dioxide and is the most abundant organic compound in the atmosphere,
according to the study's authors, all from UC Santa Barbara.
"Other people have reported this type of methane blowout, but no one
has ever checked the numbers until now," said Ira Leifer, lead author
and an associate researcher with UCSB's Marine Science Institute. "Ours
is the first set of numbers associated with a seep blowout." Leifer was
in a research boat on the surface at the time of the blowouts.
Aside from underwater measurements, a nearby meteorological station
measured the methane "cloud" that emerged as being approximately 5,000
cubic feet, or equal to the volume of the entire first floor of a
two-bedroom house. The research team also had a small plane in place,
flown by the California Department of Conservation, shooting video of
the event from the air.
Leifer explained that when this type of blowout event occurs, virtually
all the gas from the seeps escapes into the atmosphere, unlike the
emission of small bubbles from the ocean floor, which partially, or
mostly, dissolve in the ocean water. Transporting this methane to the
atmosphere affects climate, according to the researchers. The methane
blowout that the UCSB team witnessed reached the sea surface 60 feet
above in just seven seconds. This was clear because the divers injected
green food dye into the rising bubble plume.
Co-author Bruce Luyendyk, professor of marine geophysics and geological
sciences, explained that, to understand the significance of this event
(which occurred in 2002), the UCSB research team turned to a numerical,
bubble-propagation model. With the model, they estimated methane loss
to the ocean during the upward travel of the bubble plume.
The results showed that for this shallow seep, loss would have been
approximately one percent. Virtually all the methane, 99 percent of it,
was transported to the atmosphere from this shallow seep during the
blowout. Next, the scientists used the model to estimate methane loss
for a similar size blowout at much greater depth, 250 meters. Again,
the model results showed that almost all the methane would be
transported up to the atmosphere.
Over geologic time scales, global climate has cycled between warmer,
interglacial periods and cooler, glacial periods. Many aspects of the
forces underlying these dramatic changes remain unknown. Looking at
past changes is highly relevant to understanding future climate
changes, particularly given the large increase in atmospheric
greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere due to historically
recent human activities such as burning fossil fuels.
One hypothesis, called the "Clathrate Gun" hypothesis, developed by
James Kennett, professor of geological sciences at UCSB, proposes that
past shifts from glacial to interglacial periods were caused by a
massive decomposition of the marine methane hydrate deposits.
Methane hydrate is a form of water ice that contains a large amount of
methane within its crystal structure, called a clathrate hydrate.
According to Kennett's hypothesis, climatic destabilization would cause
a sharp increase in atmospheric methane -- thereby initiating a
feedback cycle of abrupt atmospheric warming. This process may threaten
the current climate, according to the researchers. Warmer ocean
temperatures from current global climate change is likely to release
methane currently trapped in vast hydrate deposits on the continental
shelves. However, consumption of methane by microbes in the deep sea
prevents methane gas released from hydrates from reaching the ocean
surface and affecting the atmosphere.
Bubbles provide a highly efficient mechanism for transporting methane
and have been observed rising from many different hydrate deposits
around the world. If these bubbles escape singly, most or all of their
methane would dissolve into the deep-sea and never reach the
atmosphere. If instead, they escape in a dense bubble plume, or in
catastrophic blowout plumes, such as the one studied by UCSB
researchers, then much of the methane could reach the atmosphere.
Blowout seepage could explain how methane from hydrates could reach the
atmosphere, abruptly triggering global warming.
Thus, these first-ever quantitative measurements of a seep blowout and
the results from the numerical model demonstrate a mechanism by which
methane released from hydrates can reach the atmosphere. Studies of
seabed seep features suggest such events are common in the area of the
Coal Oil Point seep field and very likely occur elsewhere.
The authors explain that these results show that an important piece of
the global climate puzzle may be explained by understanding
bubble-plume processes during blowout events. The next important step
is to measure the frequency and magnitude of these events. The UCSB
seep group is working toward this goal
ivars.fa...@gmail.com
year. Prof. Sornette has predicted one in the US, has not he?
Crazies Run the Asylum
news:1155338723....@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
> I am afraid there will be quite heavy eathquakes at the end of this
> year. Prof. Sornette has predicted one in the US, has not he?
Oh look, its it's KOOKHOG Day and the KOOK has emerged from his burrow. I
guess that means six more weeks of Kookspam raining on our heads.
si...@situ.com
<ivars.fa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>Excuse me , it is another gas - methane which comes out of ocean floor.
let us calculate
one Sverdrup (approx 1 mississippi, 10 amazon, or 1/100 of a gulf stream)
is 1e6 m^3/sec or 1e12 cm^3/sec
the temperature difference between warmest SST and benthic is 30 K
qdot=heat transport by 1 sverdrup through 30K is
4.2*30*1e12J/sec or 4e19J/yr
so a gulf stream from surface to depth would move 4e21 J/yr
the heat loss from ocean above 700m is 1.5e22J/yr
we need several gulf streams to move this kinda heat
i do think that the amount of methane u would have to release
to create several gulf streams worth of convection would be
very very large...
let us say that the volume of methane required would be on the same
order as the volume of water driven...
this is several 100 million cubic meters/sec (1e8 m^3/s) or
3e15 m^3/yr ... or 1.4e17 mole/yr ... or 2e18 g methane
by comparison the total mass of the atmosphere is 5e21g
so this would add 4000 ppm(parts per million) to the atmosphere
current level of methane is 1700 parts per billion...
someone would have noticed...
sidd
ivars.fa...@gmail.com
Can Methane form Co2 in water under high pressure?
Atheist 4 Bush Again
Three years is a short period but it does seem as if
there is a leak in the 'pipeline'.
I also find it interesting that El Nino events
don't seem to show up in the time series.
Also, in spite of the much clamored Arctic sea ice
extent decline, the Arctic heat content doesn't
appear to have changed much.
ivars.fa...@gmail.com
pacific coast of US,on the ocean floor.heated co2 reaches atmosphere,
people die from record temperatures.cold water in ocean is floated up
by methane turning into co2. Can you see the mechanism? western us is
not a safe place this year.
heat in form of hot methane gas is coming out from mantle via
expandingcrust at increasing rate,there will be earthquakes!