LIVERMORE, California — Using satellite observations and a large suite of climate models, Lawrence Livermore scientists have found that long-term ocean warming in the upper 700 meters of Southern Hemisphere oceans has likely been underestimated.
“This underestimation is a result of poor sampling prior to the last decade and limitations of the analysis methods that conservatively estimated temperature changes in data-sparse regions,” said LLNL oceanographer Paul Durack, lead author of a paper appearing in the October 5 issue of the journal Nature Climate Change.
Ocean heat storage is important because it accounts for more than 90 percent of the Earth’s excess heat that is associated with global warming. The observed ocean and atmosphere warming is a result of continuing greenhouse gas emissions. The Southern Hemisphere oceans make up 60 percent of the world’s oceans.
The team found that climate models simulate the relative increase in sea surface height — a leading indicator of climate change — between Northern and Southern hemispheres is consistent with highly accurate altimeter observations. However, separating the simulated upper-ocean warming in the Northern and Southern hemispheres is inconsistent with observed estimates of ocean heat content change. These sea level and ocean heat content changes should be consistent, and suggest that until recent improvements occurred in the observational system in the early 21st century, Southern Hemisphere ocean heat content changes were likely underestimated.
Since 2004, automated profiling floats (named Argo) have been used to measure global ocean temperatures from the surface down to 2,000 meters. The 3,600 Argo floats currently observing the global ocean provide systematic coverage of the Southern Hemisphere for the first time. Argo float measurements over the last decade, as well as data from earlier measurements, show that the ocean has been gradually warming, according to Durack.
“Prior to 2004, research has been very limited by the poor measurement coverage,” he said. “By using satellite data, along with a large suite of climate model simulations, our results suggest that global ocean warming has been underestimated by 24 to 58 percent. The conclusion that warming has been underestimated agrees with previous studies, however it’s the first time that scientists have tried to estimate how much heat we’ve missed.”
Given that most of the excess heat associated with global warming is in the oceans, this study has important implications for how scientists view the Earth’s overall energy budget, Durack said.
The new results are consistent with another new paper that appears in the same issue of Nature Climate Change. Co-author Felix Landerer of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, who contributed to both studies, says, “Our other new study on deep-ocean warming found that from 2005 to the present, Argo measurements recorded a continuing warming of the upper-ocean. Using the latest available observations, we’re able to show that this upper-ocean warming and satellite measurements are consistent.”
Other Livermore authors include Peter Gleckler and Karl Taylor. The study was conducted as part of the Climate Research Program at Lawrence Livermore, which is funded by the Department of Energy’s Regional and Global Climate Modeling Program. Work at NASA is a part of the newly formed NASA Sea Level Change Team (N-SCLT) and is supported by a NASA ROSES Physical Oceanography grant.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Good thing they have climate models to tell us there is heat there – god forbid we use data alone.
It’s the new postmodern science: if the data doesn’t agree with the expectations, the data must be wrong…
http://judithcurry.com/2014/10/05/evidence-of-deep-ocean-cooling/
hockeyschtick – Monday, August 20, 2012
“New paper finds Southern Oceans are losing heat ”
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2012/08/new-paper-finds-southern-oceans-are.html
NoTricksZone
Southern Ocean Cooling Since 1996 … Global Warming Scientists Deny Logic That Cold Causes More Ice!
http://notrickszone.com/2014/01/01/southern-ocean-cooling-since-1996-global-warming-scientists-deny-logic-that-cold-causes-more-ice/
http://notrickszone.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Caryl_1.png
Jimbo October 6, 2014 at 11:14 am
Stephen Wilde has a very good comment to the linked article. Southern ocean and Antarctica cool the southern hemisphere. Meanwhile the Arctic Ocean is pumping the heat out of the north Atlantic into space.
So the southern hemisphere cools as the northern hemisphere appears to warm, but is really just the conduit for heat loss from the planet. This is not looking good.
PS: To be clear: Stephen Wilde has a very good comment to the linked hockeyschtick article. Should have been more careful initially.
Michael Wassil October 6, 2014 at 12:21 pm
This interhemispheric heat movement which Steven describes is well known to oceanography, by terms such as heat piracy and the bipolar seesaw. Cross-equatorial currents are where the piracy occurs (near the Carribbean – where else?)
“we adjust the poorly constrained Southern Hemisphere observed warming estimates so that hemispheric ratios are consistent with the broad range of modelled results.”
——
“Adjust…estimates…consistent with … Modelled results”
No facts here!
The data didn’t match the models? The data must be underestimating things right?
These people have no end to their arrogance
Like all the warming in the ocean just happens to be hiding between detectors in the southern oceans.
AND THE 95% CONFIDENCE INTERVAL IS….?
“The team found that climate models simulate the relative increase in sea surface height — a leading indicator of climate change — between Northern and Southern hemispheres is consistent with highly accurate altimeter observations.”
Each altimeter measurement has a precision of +/- 13mm. The uncertainty in the rate of sea level rise is estimated to be +/-0.5mm/year with the rate in the last 10 years being 2.4mm/year (after adjustments and no extra uncertainty added).
The 95% confidence interval is probably not shown because it doesn’t fit on the plot.
“Southern Hemisphere oceans has likely been underestimated”, in other words they don’t know! So they modeled what they wished to see to support the cAGW narrative of fear.
Looks pretty benign. The southern hemisphere is cooling, and the northern is about where it started 12 years ago. The ’98 mega El-Ninio transferred some heat out of the water, and we are dithering about since then.
Once heat goes into the ocean, due to the massive heat capacity difference (water >> air), the heat is entropically degraded, and cannot heat the air more than the water temperature.
And what happened to Trenberth’s deep ocean hypothesis? What’s up with this ” warming in the upper 700 meters of Southern Hemisphere oceans has likely been underestimated.”.
-Jay
All together now . . . 1 . . . 2 . . . 3 . . .
“It’s worse than we thought!!!”
I saw this and I don’t get the hyperventilation. This is exactly the same reason we “see” more tornadoes now than we did 100 years ago: We have the ability so SEE EVERYTHING now. Just because we didn’t see the heat before doesn’t mean it wasn’t there.
Clear observational bias. It is obvious from the ARGO data that the oceans are in fact NOT warming as much as projected.
“Keep torturing the data! It will eventually tell us what we want.”
From the Durack, et al, paper referenced above comes this statement in the abstract:
” … the hemispheric partitioning of simulated upper-ocean warming is inconsistent with observed in-situ-based ocean heat content estimates. Relying on the close correspondence between hemispheric-scale ocean heat content and steric changes, we adjust the poorly constrained Southern Hemisphere observed warming estimates so that hemispheric ratios are consistent with the broad range of modelled results.”
So yes, they used models to adjust “observed in situ-based OHC estimates.” In others words we used the model to adjust the “observed” data.
New phrase of the Church of Climate Change: data is now called “observed in-situ estimates.”
Ya’ know, these are, ya’ know, PHYSICAL MODELS, so they, ya’ know, must be ya’ know, REAL!!!!
This should set off a whole new round of “adjustments”. The southern oceans are huge and a small upward trend would eliminate the flat trajectory globally. They had so much fun with the unmonitored arctic area, and this is fertile ground for years of “playing”. The fact that they doubt what observations we have, and believe the models says it all.
We can’t make sense of the forgone conclusions of our models with the data we measure from the ocean.
But since the conclusion is already a fact, that some trace gas with an fractional increase is responsible for the warming, we present the fact that the fact of data is wrong.
The science is settled.
….
Soon they will utterly forgo any measurements, and models will be absolute.
This means more hidden cooling.
If temperature increases and then levels off, like global temperature 18 years ago, and there is a big heat sink, then the incoming heat has to decrease in order for temperature to stay constant, because the sink will retain some heat.
It is like a low pass filter. At a step respons, output will raise and gradually flatten out. To get it to flatten out faster, signal must be driven down after step starts.
Well, duh! In academia, models are always right. (Said sarcastically)
First rule of climate ‘science’ , when models and reality differ in value its reality which is in error .
“However, separating the simulated upper-ocean warming in the Northern and Southern hemispheres is inconsistent with observed estimates of ocean heat content change.”
So the simulations don’t match the guesses? Really?
And I relly love that “observed estimates”….. How does one “observe” an “estimate”? Does one not MAKE an estimate and OBSERVE data? Sigh…
I also seem to recall that all the climate models were terrible at simulating ocean processes. So there is that to add to the confusion.
Yes, it’s enough to make one’s head explode! You have the term psychobabble. Well, this is climobabble!
“The observed ……… warming is a result of continuing greenhouse gas emissions.”
“Observed warming”. What observed warming?
“is a result”. Sez who? Well, sez who who knows what they are talking about?
“Ocean heat storage is important because it accounts for more than 90 percent of the Earth’s excess heat that is associated with global warming.”
========
Where do they get these percentage from? And how much more than 90? One or 10?
Lord help us.
Does this mean that sea level has increased more than we thought?
This paper does not pass the common sense test.
It is true that the sea is not level due to global gravimetric anomalies measured by GRACE. Itmis also true that some of those are over the Southern ocean. Gogle images of Earths gravimetric geoid for images.
It is not true that connected oceans can maintain differential surface level beyond gravimetric anomalies. Something about water seeking its own level. Increasingly desperate attempts to find missing heat which isn’t missing except in pause falsified models. Increasing desperation leading to increasing foolishness as the ‘science’ self destructs on Mother Nature’s facts.
My thoughts exactly. My analysis shows that the models do, by and large, show more heat going into the SH ocean (and less heat going into the NH ocean) than the observational data sets show. It is my suspicion that this may have come about as follows: first, the too-high climate sensitivity caused the modeled world as a whole to warm too fast; that was then “fixed” by assuming a large negative aerosol forcing to cancel out some of the global warming; however, that assumption led to another problem – since the aerosols were mostly in the NH the high negative aerosol forcing caused the modeled NH to cool relative to the SH, where observations showed the opposite; that problem was then “fixed” by increasing SH ocean mixing enough to cool off the SH warming sufficiently to (sort of) be consistent with observations. Problem solved – all you need do is ignore the pesky data! The patches continue to multiply.
@Rud Istvan October 6, 2014 at 11:03 am:
++++++++++
Doesn’t the wind pile up water significantly as in the ENSO processes with the Easterlies and Westerlies across the equatorial regions of the Pacific? Maybe you imply this, I’m just asking.
‘and a large suite of climate models’
Try has much as you might , but you will find the tables of Vegas will not allow you to use your own dice , for the very good reason they know who they can be loaded .
In further new priests claims image of god in Mrs Smith morning toast proves his existence , and has ‘experts ‘ who are we to say they are wrong or that they may have strong self interest in getting the ‘right results ‘
Back in the world of reality, the continued cooling of the Southern Ocean and the ALARMING growth trend of southern sea ice could lead to the glaciation of the southern tip of South America by the middle of this century.
I don’t believe in linear trend matching, so I hope you were being sarcastic. There are a number of physical reasons that would indicate that won’t happen – unless we really are at the end of the Holocene, in which case we are all in deep trouble.
Thermal expansion has begun! The acceleration is here and it’s all your fault.
“1.8 +/-0.9mm” You’ve really got to love making predictions based on measurements where the stated tolerance range is the same as the entire measurement. What other industry would even consider using measurements like that? Can you see Ford coming out with an ad touting their new electronic dashboard. “Our new gas gauge is accurate to +/- half a tank!” … yea, that would sell.
That contradicts Pierrehumbert’s screed against Koonin. Good.
Missing some heat? Hypothesize a heat hole in the Southern Ocean that isn’t there and imply that must be the missing heat. Cool . . . but not anymore.
The so-called global warming has been so lucrative and so compelling that those working the climate industry can’t let it go.
“A large suite of climate models” Well, isn’t that suite? The more you use, the suiter it gets… for those who have a suite tooth for warming.