Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach
When people say that we understand the unbelievably complex climate system well enough to project scenarios out a hundred years, I point out that new things are being discovered every week. The latest scientific finding is that plankton cause hurricanes. I know it sounds like a headline in The Onion, but there it is.
Figure 1. Phytoplankton (ocean) and Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (land), 3 year average. Data from SeaWIFS satellite. Green in the ocean indicates the presence of chlorophyll-containing plant plankton (phytoplankton). Image Credit NASA
The study hasn’t been published, but the publishers (AGU) have this to say: [updated link here]
Ocean’s Color Affects Hurricane Paths
AGU Release No. 10–25, 13 August 2010
For Immediate Release
WASHINGTON—A change in the color of ocean waters could have a drastic effect on the prevalence of hurricanes, new research indicates. In a simulation of such a change in one region of the North Pacific, the study finds that hurricane formation decreases by 70 percent. That would be a big drop for a region that accounts for more than half the world’s reported hurricane-force winds. …
In my opinion, the folks who wrote the headline missed the boat when they say that the color of the ocean affects hurricane paths. If their description of the study is correct (not yet published study, but description by publisher) what the study indicates is that the amount of microscopic life in the ocean affects hurricane formation. Or in other words, plankton cause hurricanes. I wonder if New Orleans residents can sue the wee timorous planktonic beasties for damages from Hurricane Katrina?
The mechanism which they propose for this increase in hurricane formation where plankton are present seems quite reasonable to this life-long sailor …
In the no-chlorophyll scenario, sunlight is able to penetrate deeper into the ocean, leaving the surface water cooler. The drop in the surface temperature in the model affects hurricane formation in three main ways: cold water provides less energy; air circulation patterns change, leading to more dry air aloft which makes it hard for hurricanes to grow.The changes in air circulation trigger strong winds aloft, which tend to prevent thunderstorms from developing the necessary superstructure that allows them to grow into hurricanes.
There’s another mechanism known to be at play as well. This is that certain common phytoplankton produce a chemical called dimethylsulfoniopropionate. Since no one can pronounce that correctly, it is always called DMSP. DMSP is an precursor chemical for the formation of aerosols that eventually become cloud nuclei. This increases cloud formation. So we have plankton helping build the clouds that cool the ocean surface.
The presence of plankton in the water warms the ocean surface. And clouds and hurricanes cool the ocean surface. What is the net effect of these two inter-related but opposed plankton-caused phenomena? Unknown, even as to sign. How does this net effect change, either annually, decadally, or longterm? Again, unknown.
Plankton emit chemicals that control the clouds in the skies, who would have guessed? And who would ever have thought that plankton would have the power to affect the formation of the world’s largest natural heat engine, tropical hurricanes? Talk about having your hand on the heat-loss throttle, control of hurricane formation by plankton has the smallest of life controlling the huge power of the largest of climate phenomena. How strange is that?
I do not bring up this study to draw any scientific conclusions from it at all. It’s far too early days for that, the study is not even published.
I bring it up to illustrate the awesome complexity of the climate, and how little we truly understand the often bizarre intricacies of how it works. Next time someone says that computers can project their tinkertoy scenarios out a hundred years, remind them that we just found out about the plankton and the hurricanes …
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
There is no doubt at least in near shore waters that algal blooms result in increased water temps. It is a shame that too often interesting findings get hijacked to sell a cause rather than allow Nature’s complexity to inspire wonder.
“In a simulation of such a change in one region of the North Pacific, the study finds that hurricane formation decreases by 70 percent”
A modeling study. I bet if they wanted to they could make it an increase by 70 percent by tuning the right parameter.
All these random climate fluctuations can safely be assumed to average to zero, leaving co2’s effect plain to see /sarc
It begs the question–how might Katrina have been influenced by large populations of phytoplankton in the Gulf of Mexico supported by the nutrient rich Mississippi River flowing in? Or any other hurricane in the Gulf, for that matter?
Great point.
While you are at it, we still do not truly understand why the last ice age ended:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/328/5986/1652
We are pretty dumb, remember, we are very similar organically and genetically to your family dog. Are you surprised your dog does not understand climate models? I am not surprised no human understands them either…
Starzmom-
The large amount of crap flowing in from the Mississippi means NOTHING grows in the waters off its delta, they all starve from oxygen depletion. How many more hurricanes would we have if not for the crap?
Wanta bet this doesn’t trigger off a Oil Spills Cause Hurricanes, and/or Modern Intensive farming causes hurricanes?
The former, because of the algae and phytoplankton munching happily on the bacteria that are happily munching on the oil. the former because of the nitrogen & phosphorous flowing down the Mississippi into the GoM.
No matter what, Man that misbegotten beast, is at fault.
I really am pretty tolerant, but that is one religion I can’t tolerate.
“Talking” clouds, Plankton Hurricanes, Baby Ice, there is no limit to man’s creativity.
Watch this link to find out where the next hurricane might occur.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=45214
That’s all right then.
Since 40% of phytoplankton have already disappeared through global warming:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/30/now-its-phytoplankton-panic/
and global warming is going to get rid of a load more:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/17/botanist-claims-to-overturn-establish-ocean-phytoplankton-theory-cites-global-warming-as-a-concern-for-new-theory/
it looks as thought we can stop worrying about hurricanes.
Willis, thanks for this excellent post! Biologists like me have long recognized that biological factors have been passed over by the zealous climate modeling crowd, and this is very provocative and logical.
We now witness a plethora of research regarding biological influences upon regional climate (corn in the midwest, see http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/08/09/corn-as-a-local-climate-forcing/). There will be more I’m sure.
Having done some work with phytoplankton, I believe that this is very plausible. The DMSP connection to climate has been discussed before, but downplayed.
That noise you hear is the gears in politico’s heads trying to figure out how this can all be blamed on not enough people buying Chevy Volts.
Is it any stupider than when someone suggested that man made CO2 caused global warming?
Lag? I think they have discovered a cause-effect relationship but are thinking about it in the wrong direction. That the water becomes murky is likely the beneficial side-result of SST’s getting colder and becoming conducive to plankton development. The main result of colder SST’s is a calmer hurricane season. Colder SST’s lead to more plankton and calmer hurricane seasons at the same time.
Here’s another WUWT post that discusses the effects of phyotoplankton metabolic products on climate:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/21/tiny-bubbles-in-the-brine-affect-the-climate-all-the-time/
Wait a minute, I thought I read here that AGW is killing the little critters off. And that AGW is causing an increase in hurricanes. Seems to be a logical dis-connect. But wait, a logical dis-connect may be necessary to allow AGW 😉
Plankton decline across oceans as waters warm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-10781621
If the plankton are causing hurricanes then I say good riddance to the little bastards.
Well we know that phyto takes up CO2, and less phyto would mean that either the oceans are taking up less CO2 or releasing it, but then they say less phyto means less hurricanes, which would mean less upwellings to feed more phyto, after they just said there’s less phyto and more CO2 causes more hurricanes………
make sense yet?
Someone tell Gore that the science is unsettled. BTW I hope they have inputed this into their GCMs.
Pamela is right.
Can we get a study of the amount of “ice” in the 15% ice number that is realy just ice drifting away from packs to be melted elsewhere. This would argue that the 30% number is the real number we should follow.
I thought we have lost 50% of the plankton since 1900. How these things work is not the only thing we seem not to have a very good understanding of.
Stamp out those plankton now!
Not only do microbes live throughout the ocean but now it has been discovered that they live under the earth to depths of several kilometres. The Suzuki Foundation is opposing carbon sequestration underground because it has been discovered that certain microbes LOVE CO2 and that they can use it along with iron bound in the earth to create METHANE – a much stronger GHG than CO2 and therefore IF it leaks out, then it would be even worse for the environment than CO2. Gosh, will these guys never get their heads straight? Pumping CO2 into the ground is one of the most cost effective ways we have to reduce CO2 emissions, better than hydro power, better than bio-fuels, better than nuclear, at least 10 times better than solar or wind. Yet Suzuki would oppose it on the basis that CO2 sequestered in porous rock might be found by a specific little microbe that makes methane … seems to me that might be a good thing as methane can be used as a fuel. So why wouldn’t I inject my stored carbon with the microbes on purpose and harvest the methane for fuel?
What have I missed here?
Wayne
PS see item 7 on this reference: http://www.cbc.ca/thebottomline/2010/08/august-8economics-august-15wonders-of.html
Another “computer study/model” that shows “what if”.
Dilbert to the Rescue!
http://www.dilbert.com/2010-08-11/
It is not only ocean life that is influencing the atmosphere and weather systems and perhaps the global climate but in 2008 /9 Indian atmospheric researchers found a very high UV tolerance in three species of bacteria trapped during high altitude balloon flights into the upper stratosphere at altitudes of 6 kms to 50 kms above the surface.
“Stratosphere Reveals New Bacteria”
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Stratosphere-Reveals-New-Bacteria-107216.shtml
Other research a few years ago indicated that a number of species of ocean dwelling bacteria can also act as nucleating agents for cloud water droplets.
They use the wind and surface turbulence to become airborne from the ocean surface and then use cloud droplets as a means of dispersing during their life cycle.
During this airborne dispersion period, the bacteria also act as droplet nucleating agents.
None of the biological cloud droplet nucleating agents research is apparently acceptable to the warmistas as it is another factor that is totally outside of their potential ability to control in the manner in which the natural control and feedbacks that nature uses to keep the global climate centred around a particular global temperature range that is ultimately hospitable to life on this planet.
Even admitting the existence of such natural biological control mechanisms is totally counter to the the claims that CO2 is the major factor in the control of the global climate.
Does anybody really know what time it is?