The Sceptical Science kidz and Trenberth think that the deep ocean has absorbed all the heat that isn’t showing up in the atmosphere, and that’s [why] we have “the pause”. Well, that’s busted now according to ARGO data and JPL and it has NOT gone into the deep ocean.
NOTE: Graph by Bob Tisdale – not part of the NASA press release
From NASA Jet propulsion Laboratory:
The cold waters of Earth’s deep ocean have not warmed measurably since 2005, according to a new NASA study, leaving unsolved the mystery of why global warming appears to have slowed in recent years.
Scientists at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, analyzed satellite and direct ocean temperature data from 2005 to 2013 and found the ocean abyss below 1.24 miles (1,995 meters) has not warmed measurably. Study coauthor Josh Willis of JPL said these findings do not throw suspicion on climate change itself.
“The sea level is still rising,” Willis noted. “We’re just trying to understand the nitty-gritty details.”
In the 21st century, greenhouse gases have continued to accumulate in the atmosphere, just as they did in the 20th century, but global average surface air temperatures have stopped rising in tandem with the gases. The temperature of the top half of the world’s ocean — above the 1.24-mile mark — is still climbing, but not fast enough to account for the stalled air temperatures.
Many processes on land, air and sea have been invoked to explain what is happening to the “missing” heat. One of the most prominent ideas is that the bottom half of the ocean is taking up the slack, but supporting evidence is slim. This latest study is the first to test the idea using satellite observations, as well as direct temperature measurements of the upper ocean. Scientists have been taking the temperature of the top half of the ocean directly since 2005, using a network of 3,000 floating temperature probes called the Argo array.
“The deep parts of the ocean are harder to measure,” said JPL’s William Llovel, lead author of the study, published Sunday, Oct. 5 in the journal Nature Climate Change. “The combination of satellite and direct temperature data gives us a glimpse of how much sea level rise is due to deep warming. The answer is — not much.”
The study took advantage of the fact that water expands as it gets warmer. The sea level is rising because of this expansion and water added by glacier and ice sheet melt.
To arrive at their conclusion, the JPL scientists did a straightforward subtraction calculation, using data for 2005 to 2013 from the Argo buoys, NASA’s Jason-1 and Jason-2 satellites, and the agency’s Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellites. From the total amount of sea level rise, they subtracted the amount of rise from the expansion in the upper ocean, and the amount of rise that came from added meltwater. The remainder represented the amount of sea level rise caused by warming in the deep ocean.
The remainder was essentially zero. Deep ocean warming contributed virtually nothing to sea level rise during this period.
Coauthor Felix Landerer of JPL noted that during the same period, warming in the top half of the ocean continued unabated, an unequivocal sign that our planet is heating up. Some recent studies reporting deep-ocean warming were, in fact, referring to the warming in the upper half of the ocean but below the topmost layer, which ends about 0.4 mile (700 meters) down.
Landerer also is a coauthor of another paper in the same Nature Climate Change journal issue on ocean warming in the Southern Hemisphere from 1970 to 2005. Before Argo floats were deployed, temperature measurements in the Southern Ocean were spotty, at best. Using satellite measurements and climate simulations of sea level changes around the world, the new study found the global ocean absorbed far more heat in those 35 years than previously thought — a whopping 24 to 58 percent more than early estimates.
Both papers result from the work of the newly formed NASA Sea Level Change Team, an interdisciplinary group tasked with using NASA satellite data to improve the accuracy and scale of current and future estimates of sea level change. The Southern Hemisphere paper was led by three scientists at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, California.
NASA monitors Earth’s vital signs from land, air and space with a fleet of satellites and ambitious airborne and ground-based observation campaigns. NASA develops new ways to observe and study Earth’s interconnected natural systems with long-term data records and computer analysis tools to better see how our planet is changing. The agency shares this unique knowledge with the global community and works with institutions in the United States and around the world that contribute to understanding and protecting our home planet.
Source: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=4321
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Okay.
It’s not in the atmosphere.
It’s not in the deep oceans.
what does that leave?
Cowtan and Way find some at the poles. All? Not by a long shot.
….
Can we go home now?
Unless by all we mean 1.2C per century, I think, in which case we can all go home now, right?!?
The missing heat never entered the system?
:>
Here is Judith Curry and Willis Eschenbach on the missing heat. It never went missing!!!
The trivial effect of four rather than three CO2 molecules per 10,000 dry air molecules is swamped out by negative feedbacks.
David A October 6, 2014 at 9:39 pm: “[Durack]…“The estimates that we had up until now have been pretty systematically underestimating the likely changes.”
=================================
…estimates underestimating likely changes… How far has science fallen? A more accurate quote would have been …”The observations we had up till now have been well under the models predictions.””
When your reality is cartoons, you can have Wile E. Coyote spin his legs over the abyss for several seconds – more if you want… and have anvils fall on his head and not kill him. “Whatever you want, we can do it, Mr Warner! – er, Mr Gore! You want missing heat adjusted? NO PROBLEM!”
Space?
It is even worse than we think: We’re heating Mars with the reflected sunlight from Earth.
Save Mars!! (Mars average surface temp: −55 °C.) Our irresponsible increase of Earth albedo could threaten Mars with +0.01 °C over the next millennia. Deposition of solid CO2 from the air at the poles may cease, dry ice on Mars could become a thing of the past in 10 million years.
@sturgishooper October 6, 2014 at 12:46 pm
The trivial effect of four rather than three CO2 molecules per 10,000 dry air molecules is swamped out by negative feedbacks.
++++++++++
First I am of the opinion that the CO2 is fairly saturated as to what it can do if CO2 acted as it does in the lab. That is, the logarithmic effect. However the 1 part in 10,000 dry air molecules is not trivial in the sense of the first 1 or 2 parts per 10,000. They have a significant effect according to most skeptics. That’s where it had the largest effect (according to lab results). In our atmosphere, all bets are off as to the effect of 3 to 4 parts per 10,000. That’s my take. Am I missing something?
Its hiding in the earths crust
Bob Boder — I’ve often wondered about your point. Does the science concerned with measuring global warming have the means to accurately estimate the heat transfer between Earth’s crust and the atmosphere and the ocean? Does science have the means to estimate the heat transfer between the mantle and the crust? I’m not a scientist, but it seems to me that these would have to be major factors in estimating global warming.
…except that there’s a positive heat flow from the solid earth outward. I was going to facetiously suggest that the missing heat went deeper than the deep ocean and is sitting in the oceanic crust, but only because you beat me to it have I even mentioned it.
>> have the means to accurately estimate
Gerald, absolutely not.
>> it seems to me that these would have to be major factors in estimating global warming
Absolutely, they are major factors in modelling the system, apparently missing from typical AGW oriented models.
>> …except that there’s a positive heat flow from the solid earth outward.
RockyRoad, there is a small, but steady heat transfer between land and the atmosphere, because on average, the land is slightly warmer than the air.
However, the sun is much warmer than the land, so it does transfer a large amount of energy to the land. Land thermal conductivity is good, but water is better, which leads to onshore and offshore breezes as the sun rises and sets.
Bottom line: no energy is “hiding” anywhere. If for some reason, the atmosphere was heated, energy would be transferred to the land/sea. If more energy was coming from the sun, the vast majority of it would be in the land/sea. What you seem to imply as extremely unlikely is in fact, the way thermodynamics works.
They need to re-calculate!!! By using the Jason data, the sea-level rise is exaggerated by a factor of at least 2. So there is actually less expansion, and the heat retention remainder is incorrect!!!
Major fail!!!
To be honest, Cowtan and Way didn’t “find” heat. The did a re-analysis of satellite data using a Kreiging model to assume the Arctic had more heat content than we could measure.
There never was any missing heat. Trenberth’s energy budget is simply wrong. Fantasy physics.
Deep space is warming.
Yes! It’s not in the atmosphere, nor in the deep oceans… it’s hiding in DEEP SPACE. And it will come back to get us once we’ve saturated all of deep space with our heat pollution.
We need a new organisation. IPSCC Intergovernmental Panel for Space Climate Change. After all man kind is destroying space for our children! They won’t know what cold space is like! Oh the humanity!
It’s obvious. It’s in between the sofa cushions.
RoHa, you’re a genius. I had my doubts about your theory but I checked between the sofa cushions and there it was. I also found two quarters, a broken pencil, a small pocket comb with three broken teeth and some lint. It is unknown at this time if the comb, which was branded “Sunbeam” contributed to the heat retention.
It would be nice if Cowtan and Way took a look at Africa. However, if they applied similar techniques there, they might lose some.
I can hear Trenberth now: “It’s a travesty! Travesty, I tells yer!”
“Infamy! Infamy! They’ve all got it in-for-me!” (Kenneth Williams in “Carry on Cleo”)
This on top of the August, 2014 study by Carl Wunsch and Patrick Heimbach that found the deepest part of ocean was likely cooling.
http://ocean.mit.edu/~cwunsch/papersonline/wunsch&heimbach_jpo2014_bidecadalheat.pdf
These two are the only studies which took a comprehensive look at the deep ocean heat content/temperature change below 2000 metres.
Figure 20 (top) of this paper is particularly striking.
“One of the most prominent ideas is that the bottom half of the ocean is taking up the slack, but supporting evidence is slim. ”
Translation:
“We have absolutely no real world data that supports our claims, but we are fighting tooth and nail to keep our jobs and salvage our reputations in face of the unfair and dirty tricks that Mother Nature has stooped to in refusing to co-operate with our computer models. We stand by our computer output and our lawyers are seeking to serve cease and desist orders on Ms. Nature as soon as her residence has been located “.
Better translation: We don’t know. Maybe we can’t know. But the precautionary principle compels us to destroy civilization as quickly as possible before something bad happens to all of humanity.
Khomeini times ayatollah? All the unicorns took it to the bottom of the ocean to save us. Hello … do you see any unicorns around?
Nah,
Unies can’t breathe under water…twas the mermaids wot done it
Of course not. They’re all at the bottom of the abyss, storing excess heat.
RSS August 1998 vs RSS August 2014. Hum, it looks MUCH cooler over the oceans now compared to 1998.
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/09/18/us-government-agencies-just-cant-stop-lying/
BTW, look at the center of Africa in the 2014 RSS image. Yet GISS shows no data for the entire region, and then later in-fills the area in red.
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/09/18/us-government-agencies-just-cant-stop-lying/
David, obviously the missing heat must be somewhere so if there’s a region we’re not monitoring then that must be where the heat is. It’s the only logical explanation. The models are skillful, the science is settled, the world is dangerously overheating, it’s our fault, and the only way to stop it is to ditch democracy and hand over all sovereignty to the UN.
(For those that need it: /sarc)
There is one parameter we might have forgot : The Ice on the Poles now are warmer than before. Ie the Global Warming is hiding in the ice
Naaah. It deep penetrated the crust and is now hiding in the Earth’s core at millions of degrees C (as per Al Gore).
I’ve always thought the missing heat might have gone into dark matter.
Would that make AlGore a hot head?
Which is missing as well.
Perhaps they ran off togather?
Well, we have “dark matter” and “dark energy”. Why not “dark heat”?
LOL. Must remember that one. Will use it to my letters to the various editors of MSM.
What sea level rise? See NOAA mean sea level data for the west coast and the Gulf coast.
Show zero trend.
The trend isn’t zero, bout close to it. San Francisco has the longest tide gauge record in the Western Hemisphere. In 158 years sea level at San Francisco rose only 107 millimeters (4.2 inches) or 2.7 inches per century, a tiny rate of increase. At that rate it takes over 22 centuries, not 86 years, to reach “expert” predictions of an increase of 5 feet by 2100. Only 129 years ago, the 1884 San Francisco sea level was only 1.8” lower than 2013.
Sea level fell since 1997 in San Francisco, San Diego, Los Angeles, and Seattle, plus Victoria and Vancouver in Canada, when all the “experts” agree it must rise at an accelerating rate to increase 5 feet by 2100.
All six cities had higher sea levels in both 1983 and 1997 than in 2013.
The last 15-20 years show zero trend for all west coast gauges and Gulf coast gauges except for one or two that record local uplift or subsidence.
Sea level has been rising at about the same rate since the depths of the Little Ice Age, c. 1700, with minor fluctuations. Nothing to see here.
Speaking of sea level changes, I wish that alarmists in Oz would decide whether human global activities cause drought or floods there:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/aug/23/australian-floods-global-sea-level
The article blames the slow down in sea level rise on the rains on Antipodean plains.
I keep hearing from people that sea levels are rising. I say the sun comes up every morning. Sea level has been rising since the last de-glaciation. I have evidence showing DEceleration in recent years. Why they keep bringing up this red herring?
Oh dear. That’s awkward.
There must be a vast conspiracy of denialists holding the heat hostage in their secret bunkers.
I guess a good question is did they use the Tide Gauge sea level data (of about 1.6 mm/year) or the adjusted satellite sea level rise (of about double at 3.2 mm/year) to estimate the thermostatic sea level rise.
The trick is to plot satellite data on an inclined base. For the rate of incline they selected some tidal gauges from locales undergoing subsidence and thus they can claim an observational basis for their fabrication. This trick was devised I believe by the U of Colorado and is copied now by NOAA among others. There is in fact no rise in sea level, in a general sense, worldwide.
Why do I remember Gilligan moving the the professor’s sea level stake in order to trap ? Lobsters. And the professor thinking the island was sinking…
trap “bigger” lobsters. I always thought they were cold water creatures (well at least not tropical).
Bill Illis,
After watching this short Video I have come to the conclusion that measuring Global sea level to the Millimetre is impossible.Even at the end they say to the nearest Metre.
Just because the oceans seem to be behaving as if there is no Secret Heat Layer doesn’t mean it’s not there. Maybe it moves. Maybe there are really really deep heat pockets. So there. #science
Besides as we officially dump the 2 deg C target for max AGW as part of the new trend toward a concept of Climate Change unconstrained by silly metrics like temperature, the notion of an undetectable secret heat stash will fit nicely in the new broader contextual view. Heck, there is already a growing consensus that the Secret Heat Layer not only exists but it is even more dangerous than the intense rapid warming already believed to be happening up here on the surface.
We seek it here, we seek it there, we seek that warming ANYWHERE.
It’s trapped in the models.
The way things are going, children just won’t know what heat is.
It’s hiding in their porridge
You missed the rest Trenberth I am I am ;>)
“Is it at the ples, or in the deepest sea, that damned elusive, OHC.”
Ack1 “Is it at the poles,…”
I havn’t done the calcs myself but isn’t the heat capacity of the oceans so massive that even if extra greenhouse heat was somehow being absorbed by the oceans, wouldn’t it be so small as to be unmeasurable anyway?
Anyone have any references for this calculation?
Climate4you calculates it in J/m2, that makes it easier to find out how many W/m2 it is over some time.
Dave in Canmore, very good scientific understanding.
Ocean T = ( 1.6×10^27 (Energy-ocean@273) + 1.03×10^22(Energy-atmos@2c ) / 1.4×10 ^21 kg / 4185 (Cp) = 273.000175
In words: If for some reason, the atmosphere was heated so that it was 2 degC hotter than normal, this energy would transfer to the land & sea. If for some reason, it was only absorbed by the ocean, it would show up as a steady state increase of .000175 degC.
Then how can working scientists calmly announce that ocean heat content data explains or could explain missing heat? I can hardly believe that such basic and non-controversial science literacy is missing in scientists and media.
1) it’s been shown that all of the so called “science” behind agw has been created by a very small group of people.
2) Almost all intellectually honest scientists work in other fields, so they don’t feel qualified to but in.
3) Others are being psychologically manipulated.
4) massive amounts of government money began pouring into US universities in the 70s. Bribery and extortion work pretty well. This is why many skeptics are foreign.
BTW, concerning the RSS images. In general they do geographically match fairly well with the surface GISS readings, so a major difference in the center of Africa, where RSS shows cool, and GISS in-fills warm from surrounding warm regions, is likely part of the record divergence between GISS and RSS. I question he infilling process.
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/09/18/out-of-africa/
Abyssal expansion = sea level change – glacial melt – upper 2000 meter ocean expansion.
The error bars in almost every one of these measurements is large especially in the glacial melt measurement. I don’t having much confidence in this measurement.
I was thinking the same thing, AFAIK that glacial melt figure is model based isn’t it?
All of the measurements involved require ‘model’ like adjustments. Sea level, even when measured with tidal gauges, is based on a geo model of gravity, a model of land movements up and down and requires filtering for tides. The satellite based methods require many more ‘models’.
The upper 2000 meter expansion is based on the well known expansion factor for water based on the temperature of that water. But the data requires in-fillling for areas that lack ARGO data (under ice, shallow seas), also a ‘model’ for sensor ‘issues’ on the floats themselves.
But the glacial melt has the most model based error bars. We can easily measure the sea and land extent of glaciers from satellite but the thickness is much more difficult. The Antarctic glaciers for example are ~2km thick and we are talking about a change of a few mm per year. The measurements are highly ‘model’ based even when based on gravimetric satellites, but much more so when based on glacier movement.
My fear here is all of the data is so politicized that little truth can be found. If all the components of this calculation have been adjusted to tell a necessary ‘truth’ then we really can’t say what’s happening in the abyssal deep.
So Dana is busted.
This too is interesting.
”mystery of why global warming appears to have slowed in recent years”
It’s no mystery. The TCR to 2XCO2 is probably around 1°C and the ECS is most likely between -1 and 1 °C (+/-). That’s the significance of the pause, even if you buy into the “forcing” model of thought the climate is not warming @ur momisugly 0.3 °C per decade but more like 0.3 °C per 3 decades.
The mystery is how long will it take before they admit they overestimated the anthropogenic component of global warming?
…they’ll find the missing heat first.
“The mystery is how long will it take before they admit they overestimated the anthropogenic component of global warming?”
That would depend on when governments stop funding ‘Global Climate Warming Change’ studies with our taxes. Though they’ll never admit they were wrong, they’ll just fade away, until a century from now people are asking ‘whatever happened to Global Climate Warming Change, anyway?’
Oh my, how I love watching the ‘Ocean ate the Heat’ excuse go down in flames.
Wouldn’t that heat the ocean and thus save the day for AGW?
I see a hockey stick in popcorn prices.
Mods: minor typo in sub-heading: …and that’s way we have “the pause” ……
…..and that’s why we have “the pause” …..
So, where is the direct human-induced forcing of +2.3 W/m2/year in 2013 showing up.
And where are the feedbacks (water vapour, less cloud) of another +1.8 W/m2/year showing up.
All we can find is 0.535 W/m2/year, in total.
“All we can find is 0.535 W/m2/year, in total.”
As a watt is defined in terms of joules per second, your unit of measurement does not exist.
1.16 * 10^22 joules of energy absorption across the whole ocean surface over 1.0 full year = 1.0 W/m2 of energy absorption continuously over one year = 0.004C/year of increase temperature in the full 0-2000 metres of ocean.
This is why this finding of no ocean warming below 2000 metres is important. There is really no other place that the missing energy can be found and the theories estimates are just way way off.
In the case of this chart, “Missing and/or Increased Emissions to Space” might also include incorrect theories about how strong the human-induced forcings are or incorrect assumptions about how strong the feedbacks are. For those interested in how much the increased emissions to space might be – Church and White 2011 stated that increased OLR should be about 0.8 W/m2, Trenberth’s CCM3 had it at about 1.4 W/m2 and CERES has it at 0.85 W/m2. That does not close the “Missing Energy” budget by very much.
http://s13.postimg.org/turztazs7/Missing_Energy_Increase_OLR.png
Someone explain to me why now? Did the heat suddenly decide to stop warming the atmosphere and seek refuge in the briny deep?
Why is there so much discussion about what should be plain facts?
And by the way, an unanswered question via Dr. Bill Cosby: Why Is There Air?
Somehow the ocean started soaking up heat, and this happened around 2005. I have filed for a joint grant from NOAA, CSIRO and the Grantham Institute to investigate this phenomenon using my climate simulation calculator. As soon as I get the grant I’ll notify my best research assistant and we will depart to investigate ocean pH and sea currents in the Bahamas.
What does she look like?
Greg, with a grant like that, I’m sure an appropriate female applicant can be found.
Why Is There Air? So watermelons can tax what you breath.
Where oh where is the “missing” heat?
it’s not in the ocean …
it’s not in the air …
the heat’s got to be hiding somewhere …
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_IM9Blz0yVvc/TGX9rIefuwI/AAAAAAAAAsM/yXHECiWxjyY/s1600/Hide+and+Seek.jpg
Its on its way to Mars, Jupiter, Saturn and beyond, after having been reflected off the Earth at wavelengths that CO2 cannot intercept. Didn’t care to stick around here to the AGW crowd’s detriment!!!
Check out cloud coverage over the equatorial Pacific from our extended La Nina!!! And how about the record 20 million sq/km 70% reflecting floating ice around Antarctica replacing 80% absorbing ocean.
Check Sam I am.
Here is a reaction from a member of the public on the missing heat.
http://maxcdn.fooyoh.com/files/attach/images/3004/141/953/004/Monkey_facepalm.jpg