Ozone depletion trumps greenhouse gas increase in jet-stream shift

The researchers used an algorithm to examine the relationship between daily weather patterns and the four wind patterns. They found that the first wind pattern in their computer model
I don’t suppose any of these ‘climate computer modelers’ ever stepped outside the computer room to empirically test their hypothesis expressed in algorithms before they rushed out the press release?
No I thought not.

“finding that ozone is more important than greenhouse gases in influencing the jet-stream shift”
Is it the ozone or is it solar UV variation?

“Important impacts on people’s livelihoods”. I’m guessing that’s not supposed to include getting richer, right?

“this paper is also important because it uses a new approach to try to better understand climate change; it uses observational data on a short time scale to try to look at cause and effect, which is something that is rarely done in climate research,” said Feldstein”
O my gawd!!! Looking at the synoptic reality! What a novel approach… but it was short lived since “The researchers used an algorithm to examine the relationship between daily weather patterns and the four wind patterns. They found that the first wind pattern — which corresponded to an equatorward shift of the midlatitude westerlies — was associated with greenhouse gases.”
That is truly brilliant: what is the relationship between amount of equatorward shift and amount of greenhouse gas? Does the wind pattern changes when it is CH4 or CO2 since they both have different shelf life in the atmosphere? Cows versus cars… That must be for the next paper… LOL
And the pearl: “The other two wind patterns were unrelated to either of the forcings.”
As if patterns of atmospheric circulation were independent from each others… And that guy is a professor of meteorology? Wow. Penn is more like pain…

“According to Lee, based on modeling studies, both ozone depletion and greenhouse gas increase are thought to have contributed to the southward shift of the Southern Hemisphere jet stream, with the former having a greater impact. B, but until now, no one has been able to determine the extent to which each of these two forcings has contributed to the shift using observational data.”
So many wrong things in this short paragraph……………..
They made the determination using modeling studies.
Pathetic.

So much is wrong with this paper I can’t even begin to critique it. Hindcast anyone????? Estimating the amount of energy it takes to shift the JET STREAM? Anyone??? Bueller? Bueller??

TomRude;
That is truly brilliant: what is the relationship between amount of equatorward shift and amount of greenhouse gas?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And they detected this using observational data based on a ten day fluctuation.
One has to wonder if:
a) they didn’t explain themselves properly
b) they explained themselves properly, they just didn’t stop to think how absurd that is
c) this is an experiment to see how absurd your science can be and still get published

Why does that image show ozone depletion in the *north* pole? Or am I just making a stupid mistake?

Oops. Nevermind.

‘“When most people look at ozone and greenhouse gases, they focus on one wind pattern, but my previous research suggests that, by looking at several different but similar patterns, you can learn more about what is really happening,” said Feldstein.
In their study, the researchers analyzed four wind patterns. The first wind pattern corresponded to an equatorwarda shift of the midlatitude westerlies toward the equator. T; the second pattern also described an equatorward shift, but included a strong tropical component. T; the third pattern corresponded to a poleward shift of the westerlies toward the South Pole with a weakening in the maximum strength of the jet; and the. The fourth pattern corresponded to a smaller poleward jet shift with a strong tropical component.
In addition to their novel inclusion of more than one wind pattern in their analysis, the scientists investigated the four wind patterns at very short time scales.’
Novel conclusion in climate science, alright. Looks like an intelligent shift in focus toward empiricism. Eventually, they will have as many patterns as Baskin-Robbins has flavors. Science is hard; always has been and always will be. So-called climate scientists, alarmists, are woefully unaware of this truth and it shows in their work.

Between the two potential chicken and egg systems, the jet stream affecting oceans, or oceans affecting jet streams, I look at stored energy available. Me thinks the relatively dense sloppy slurpy stuff called water (and there are how many tons of it?) has far more energy available to affect jet stream position and loops (how dense and energy absorbent is that made-of-air ribbon thingy anyway?) than the jet streams have on oceans. I have no Ph.D. after my name, no meteorology course under my belt, yet I can figure that the oceans have my vote. Once again, who the hell let this person do research???? And on my &^%$* dime!

I fail to believe that a small concentration of ozone at altitude can drive the behavior of the Southern jet stream. It is similar to claiming the trace gas CO2 drives anything. There is simply too little gas to do what they claim.

Appreciate how the little density atmosphere at jet stream level is moving all lower tropospheric denser air masses even sometimes from east to west in northern hemisphere if one cares to check on satellite images… And the faster jet streams also get a more convoluted trajectory in winter… Dust drives landslide and if you blow on the dust, landslide will change direction… tail wags dog too/sarc off.

Don’t know about you,but if I lived in the Southern hemisphere,I would be more worried about a NORTHERN shift in the jet stream.

Uh… the reason there’s an ozone “hole” over the south pole is because its the south pole

Look folks, there’s holes at both poles. If you don’t believe me just take any globe out of its stand and have a look.

There is nothing in the work that tells us that ozone depletion causes the change rather than the change causes ozone depletion that I can see. Any correlation does not tell us the first thing about which is the cause and which the effect. They taught us that at thirteen in my day but no climate scientist seems to be aware of this any more. When climate scientists were told in 2002 that the effects were zonal not global they rewarded their peers by removing them from the professions by a total removal of all grants. My lack of faith in climate science has reached a new low from a base line I thought could sink no lower.

“Climate models are usually run for many years; they don’t look at the day-to-day weather,” said Feldstein. “But we learned that the four wind patterns fluctuate over about 10 days, so they change on a time scale that is similar to daily weather. ”
Who’ld have thunk it??????????????
And someone needed a grant t come up with that?? Who doles out the grants in America??

“Understanding the differences between these two forcings is important in predicting ……who will get the most funding…..”
I have to agree with some of the posters here. My belief in the ability of “climate scientists” like these is approaching zero. I now greet almost every one of these sort of papers with a snort of derision from the outset.
This is not good.

Yeah, right.?
Modelled or from empirical measurement?

Brent Walker says:
January 31, 2013 at 6:56 pm
The Extreme and Far UV emissions provide the energy to create Ozone in the upper stratosphere, mesosphere and lower thermosphere and the various nitrogen oxides in those locations. Over time the more EUV and FUV emissions there are the greater the depth of the Ozone column. The more Ozone there is the more the jet streams move to the poles and the less depth to the Rossby waves (loopiness of the jet stream). What we are seeing at present is a long term reduction of about 40% in the EUV and FUV emissions and a reduction in Ozone resulting even in a hole in the Ozone layer in the last two Northern Hemisphere springs. So the jet streams are migrating towards the equator and the Rossby waves are getting deeper.
If you look at today’s map of the jets streams in both the Northern and Southern hemisphere you will see the jet stream that in the summer normally crosses Australia either just below the continent or at least across Melbourne is currently crossing NSW and Southern Queensland. Also the lower polar jet stream is rising almost from Antarctica to partially link up with the jet stream crossing the continent before diving to below the South Island of New Zealand – in other words a rather extreme loop but one which has caused weather forecasters to suggest there may be some summer snow on the alps in northern Victoria and some rather wild weather in NSW. Also there are parts of the Northern Hemisphere jet stream that appear to have crossed the equator into the Southern Hemisphere in the Pacific. You have to look at both the northern and southern hemisphere jet stream maps to see this.
How the Ozone layer affects the jet streams is not fully understood. But planetary waves and gravity waves are thought to play a part. But it may be as simple as the lower Ozone levels allow more infra-red heat to radiate from Earth into space. This means less is being trapped in the stratosphere and these slightly lower temperatures in the stratosphere then cause a general shift in the jet streams toward the equator where the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere are warmer.
Until recently climate scientists were blaming increasing levels of atmospheric CO2 for causing the gradual migration of jet streams towards the poles in the last three decades of the 20th Century. Given that atmospheric levels of CO2 are still increasing and the jet streams are now moving towards the equator they have had to revise their theories. Also there is no talk of CFC’s affecting the Ozone layer this time. That 1970′s scare was mostly furphy given that the solar cycle at that time was fairly weak.
The answer of course to the question of “How does the ozone hole affect the Jetstream?” is that it doesn’t. The ozone hole is another indication of weak UV and EUV.
As Pamela Gray says:
January 31, 2013 at 7:11 pm
Between the two potential chicken and egg systems, the jet stream affecting oceans, or oceans affecting jet streams, I look at stored energy available. Me thinks the relatively dense sloppy slurpy stuff called water (and there are how many tons of it?) has far more energy available to affect jet stream position and loops (how dense and energy absorbent is that made-of-air ribbon thingy anyway?) than the jet streams have on oceans. I have no Ph.D. after my name, no meteorology course under my belt, yet I can figure that the oceans have my vote. Once again, who the hell let this person do research???? And on my &^%$* dime!
The place on the Earth where there is the most energy is the equatorial regions between the tropics of Cancer and Capricorn as they are receiving direct insolation all year from the Sun. The hot SSTs lead to towering convective storms up to 12 miles or more in the atmosphere lifting the tropopause to 60,000 – 70,000 ft . These are the updrafts of the Hadley cells when the Sun’s energy especially, in the short wave frequencies, is high then the light penetrates deep into the oceans heating them. As the sea surface temperatures increase the convection increases. The Hadley cells grow and push the Ferrel cells the temperate convective bands poleward causing the Jetstreams to become latiduninal and reducing the depth of the Rossby waves. At the same time the increase in the EUV/UV increases the amount of ozone being formed in the upper atmosphere reducing the size of the ozone holes at the poles. When the EUV/UV reduces then the Hadley cells reduce the Ferrel cells move equatorward and the jetstreams become loopy with large Rossby waves making them more meridonal.
The ozone level and the Jetstream meridonality are effects of the same cause – the lowered level of EUV / UV short wave radiation from the Sun.
We then see the knock on effects of that in the formation of blocking (omega) highs due to the ocean temperatures in the North Atlantic and Rossby waves in the Jetstream. These blocked Rossby waves lead to areas that are having dry polar air drawn equatorward or wet tropical air drawn poleward resulting in areas of continual rain and storms and areas of continual drought. The increased length of the meridonal Jetstream increases the amount of cloud formation in the frontal systems as their track is longer leading to higher albedo and cooler SSTs. This is just the pattern that can be seen at the moment. It is probable that the same pattern with blocking highs as last year will pertain and in the northern hemisphere the areas that had drought in the mid-west will have more drought and the areas that had lots of rain such as NW Europe. will continue to receive lots of rain Similarly the rather bad weather in the southern hemisphere will repeat although due to the lack of land masses and mountains they tend not to get the same blocking highs but rather unseasonable and extreme weather as loops in the Jetstream pass them.

“Not only are the results of this paper important for better understanding climate change, but this paper is also important because it uses a new approach to try to better understand climate change; it uses observational data on a short time scale to try to look at cause and effect, which is something that is rarely done in climate research,” said Feldstein. “Also, our results are consistent with climate models, so this paper provides support that climate models are performing well at simulating the atmospheric response to ozone and greenhouse gases.”
————–
“Use observational data on a short time scale”
Since “looking for cause and effect on short time scales” is not a new approach to their scientific method, I’d have to say the new approach must be “using observational data” to “better understand climate change”.
I wonder if the observational data was from the models?
Dummies…and here you thought the science was settled.
While these brilliant scientists on their own figured out another “new approach to better understand climate change.”
Thank goodness someone is finally looking at short time scales.
One other note they mention: “changes in the Southern Hemisphere jet stream.”
I thought the SH temp and snow were doing ok.
cn

“Previous research suggests…”
I like to think of a skeptic as an early bird. The alarmists take five to ten years to dismiss a potty theory or climate model, we do it straight away. Both sides are right, but one side gets a lot more funding than the other.

It is quite simple: during a solar cycle, the amount of UV changes ten times more than the change in amount of total solar energy reaching the earth (1% vs. 0.1%), which gives more ozone formation near the equator, as Brent Walker already said. The extra ozone absorbes more UV energy which heats the stratosphere around the equator more during solar maxima than during minima. See
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/04/990412075538.htm (but forget the climate model babble).
That is what causes the shift of the jet streams poleward and reverse during solar minima. With the current low maximum in solar activity, the jet streams didn’t shift that far poleward as in previous maxima, thus giving different weather patterns.
The jet stream position is extremely important, as it gives huge differences in clouds and rain patterns and river flows: From the Nile, Po (Italy – Venice) and Portuguese rivers around the Mediterranean to the Mississippi in the US and similar in South Africa. See for the stratosphere-troposphere connection:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2005GL024393/abstract
and for the river flows e.g.:
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2005/2005GL023787.shtml (Portugal)
http://ks.water.usgs.gov/Kansas/pubs/reports/paclim99.html (Mississippi delta)
Ozone depletion is going on from the equator to the poles (natural and maybe human made), but near the equator more is formed than destroyed. If there is less formation during low solar activity, that will give a larger “hole” near the poles, but largely depending of stratospheric temperatures (preferably below -80°C), reason why the colder Antarctic shows larger depletion than the Arctic.
Thus the researchers have exchanged cause and effect, not for the first time in the climate field…

digger says:
February 1, 2013 at 3:29 am
….As a side, the high cost of gases, regulatory requirements & hence repair costs forces many people now just to buy a new unit and not fix old ones. Again, another completely “environmentally unfriendly” result of a green agenda gone wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The “Green Agenda” was just the propaganda or sheepskin covering the wolves. Too bad the environuts have never figure that out. SEE: Archer Daniels Midland Co. and Bio-fuel from Mother Jones no less!

Nice to see the matters discussed in my work being more widely discussed.
I’ve been banging on about jet stream shifts as a result of the interaction between solar and oceanic variations for nearly 6 years.
I still think they have the sign of the atmospheric response to solar effects wrong though.

Paul Vaughan says:
February 1, 2013 at 11:00 am
According to Shindell, the new study also confirms that changing levels of energy from the sun are not a major cause of global warming.
As I said, forget the AGW babble in the article, which indeed contradicts the preceding paragraphs of empirical evidence. But remember, the article is from 1999, when any article must contain some sentence of adherance to the “consensus”, or wasn’t published…

pochas.
The stratosphere cooled when the sun was active and is now warming a little with the less active sun.
You and they have the sign of the solar effect wrong.
I am not satisfied that there is any net warming from CO2 since it provides an additional radiative window for energy loss to space which is not supplied by non radiative gases.

@ Ferdinand Engelbeen (February 1, 2013 at 11:15 am)
Thanks sincerely for the clarification Ferdinand. The clarity of your thinking on this subject is impressive.

Paul Vaughan says:
February 1, 2013 at 9:40 am
Ian W (February 1, 2013 at 4:24 am) wrote:
“The ozone level and the Jetstream meridonality are effects of the same cause – the lowered level of EUV / UV short wave radiation from the Sun.”
So you’re suggesting EUV / UV directly modulates equator-pole temperature gradients? If so, how have you ruled out a role for other wavelengths in modulating equator-pole temperature gradients? For example, is it that you agree with the following?
“Issues in Climate Science Underlying Sun/Climate Research
Isaac M. Held, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory
[…]
11-year solar cycle […] Strengthening the horizontal temperature gradient alters in turn the fluxes of angular momentum by midlatitude eddies. The angular momentum budget of the troposphere controls the surface westerlies. […] ozone.”
– accessible via: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13519

==============
I think that the quote from that paper actually agrees with what I said which was not solely EUV/UV — what I said was:
“”The place on the Earth where there is the most energy is the equatorial regions between the tropics of Cancer and Capricorn as they are receiving direct insolation all year from the Sun. The hot SSTs lead to towering convective storms up to 12 miles or more in the atmosphere lifting the tropopause to 60,000 – 70,000 ft . These are the updrafts of the Hadley cells when the Sun’s energy especially, in the short wave frequencies, is high then the light penetrates deep into the oceans heating them. As the sea surface temperatures increase the convection increases. The Hadley cells grow and push the Ferrel cells the temperate convective bands poleward causing the Jetstreams to become latiduninal and reducing the depth of the Rossby waves. At the same time the increase in the EUV/UV increases the amount of ozone being formed in the upper atmosphere reducing the size of the ozone holes at the poles.””
—–
The point is that both the changes in ozone level and the changes in the vigor of the Hadley cell circulation is due to the change in short wave (including UV/EUV) radiation from the Sun. Or as the paper you quote the horizontal temperature gradient is altered – as the oceans are warmed by stronger short wave radiation. The ‘ozone hole’ does not push jetstreams, the jetstreams moves because the Hadley cells enlarge and the Ferrel cells (midlatitude eddies) move. The paper you quote is saying the same thing as I am.

Some help with visualization …
http://i45.tinypic.com/ne827o.gif
= climatology map animation of (1) hemispheric seasonal extremes & (2) global annual averages of:
a) 2m Temperature
b) 200 hPa Wind — (streaks represent average jet streams)
c) Column Integrated Ozone
Credit: assembled using JRA-25 Atlas ( http://ds.data.jma.go.jp/gmd/jra/atlas/eng/atlas-tope.htm ) images. JRA-25 long-term reanalysis is a collaboration of Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) & Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry (CRIEPI).
Still-Frames:
1. hemispheric seasonal extremes:
a) 2m temperature: http://i46.tinypic.com/2prtj5i.png
b) 200 hPa Wind: http://i45.tinypic.com/fvb9zk.png
c) column integrated ozone:
— JRA-25: http://i46.tinypic.com/346aut3.png
— ERA-40: http://i49.tinypic.com/2cqintu.png (for comparison)
2. global annual averages:
a) 2m temperature: http://ds.data.jma.go.jp/gmd/jra/atlas/surface-1/t2m_ANN.png
b) 200 hPa Wind: http://ds.data.jma.go.jp/gmd/jra/atlas/isobar-1/w200_ANN.png
c) column integrated ozone:
— JRA-25: http://ds.data.jma.go.jp/gmd/jra/atlas/column-1/ozone_ANN.png
— ERA-40: http://www.ecmwf.int/research/era/ERA-40_Atlas/images/full/C02_LL_YEA.gif (for comparison)
Note the steep equator-pole gradients north & south of the Indo-Pacific Warm Pool (IPWP) and the more gentle gradients of the East Pacific (off the west coast of the Americas).
Average jet streams are more stationary where average equator-pole temperature gradients are steep, such as where cold winter continental-east-coasts meet warmer ocean-western-boundaries.

Everything she writes is magic…
God made man and earth then rested. Then he made a red haired Irish woman and nobody’s rested since.
Wow, a hot July summer baby, wow that’s superb! July 31, me.
If I were blessed to be half as smart as you… get on me knees every day, Maranatha!
Is this true? Scientists say kissing started because of a craving for salt. They say a caveman discovered he could cool off on a hot day by licking his neighbors cheeks. Then he found it was much more fun if his neighbor was a female. Then he forgot all about the salt.

Time for a reminder:
http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=6645
“How The Sun Could Control Earth’s Temperature”
Which covered much the same ground in November 2010
and which explains why the sign of the atmospheric response to solar variations must be wrong in light of events during the MWP and LIA and late 20th century.

A cautionary note:
Total column ozone (TOZ) is synchronized with the solar Schwabe cycle, but it differs in phase by 1/4 cycle …so the Schwabe cycle’s driving the rate of change of TOZ.
Compare the following:
http://i45.tinypic.com/bfxn4.png
http://i48.tinypic.com/349fbs2.png

The tropospheric component of column ozone tracks ENSO:
http://acd-ext.gsfc.nasa.gov/Data_services/cloud_slice/gif/enso10.gif
http://acd-ext.gsfc.nasa.gov/Data_services/cloud_slice/#oei
In our study of tropospheric solar-terrestrial relations, how can we isolate decadal latitudinal-gradient effects when interannual longitudinal-gradient effects intensely scramble the signal?
Here’s an example of the clarity with which aggregate axial constraints can be detected if due care is taken in the design of metrics to ensure that mathematical properties of irregular downscale spatiotemporal turbulence are not allowed to dominate & corrupt macroscopic statistical summaries:
Solar-Terrestrial Magnetic Polarity Weave
http://i48.tinypic.com/2cfy0rm.png

The semi-permanent polar atmospheric pressure oscillations create extensive winds or lack thereof that widen (and weaken) or tighten (and strengthen) the pressure systems at the poles. Since stratospheric ozone can get moved around by winds (aka pressure systems), it makes sense that if the pressure system spreads the ozone out, it will look like a widening hole. If the pressure system squeezes the ozone into a tighter and thicker amount at the poles, it will look like the hole has closed. Yes?

Pamela,
That doesn’t work because in the late 20th century the polar pressure systems tightened up yet the ozone hole increased.
That is the opposite of your scenario.
Now with a quieter sun the polar prssure systems have loosened up but ozone is recovering.
That is one of the reasons I think that the consensus has the sign of the solar effect wrong.

I almost hate to go there, but do you suppose there are emails somewhere on someone’s server between today’s scientists who contemplated the ozone hole and atmospheric pressure systems? Who thought of reversing the link suggested in 2004 between the Antarctic Oscillation and ozone hole cause and effect in the paper I referenced in order to get today’s grant money for today’s research paper?
I could envision training a model on the link between the two and then dialing up the ozone hole input (and assuming it is anthropogenic) to produce a change in the Antarctic Oscillation which in turn would probably change the jet stream. Models may not be able to produce cause and effect internally. But the researchers may be saying that SIMPLY because THEY turned up the dial.
I hope not. We are screwed if that is what they are doing with models and their input dials.

Stephen, this may also help.
http://jisao.washington.edu/data/annularmodes/other_papers/appenzeller_GRL_original.pdf

It is much more likely that the ozone layer is influenced by the jet stream rather than the jet stream influenced by a trace gas at altitude. The idea that ozone may influence the jet stream is the same aberrant thinking that allows the idea that a trace gas, CO2, drives the climate.