Guest post by Bob Tisdale
http://downloads.globalchange.gov/usimpacts/pdfs/climate-impacts-report.pdf
As noted in the title, it fails to address the multiyear effects of El Nino-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) events on global temperature.
Other than explosive volcanic eruptions, El Nino-Southern Oscillation events have the greatest impacts on global climate on annual and multiyear bases. The year-to-year global temperature impacts of ENSO events are clearly visible in a comparative time-series graph, Figure 1. Also visible are the overriding effects of the 1982 El Chichon and 1991 Mount Pinatubo volcanic eruptions.
http://i44.tinypic.com/144ag5f.jpg
Figure 1
The multiyear impacts of the 1986/87/88 and 1997/98 El Nino events on Northern Hemisphere Lower Troposphere Temperature (TLT) are clearly visible in the TLT Time-Latitude Plot available from Remote Sensing Systems (RSS). Refer to Figure 2 and 3, which are from my post “RSS MSU TLT Time-Latitude Plots…Show Climate Responses That Cannot Be Easily Illustrated With Time-Series Graphs Alone.”
http://i44.tinypic.com/16leq39.jpg
Figure 2
#########
http://i41.tinypic.com/2vwzmdj.jpg
Figure 3
A seldom-discussed, naturally occurring oceanic process called Reemergence (Refer to my post “The Reemergence Mechanism”) provides the mechanism by which the global oceans integrate the effects of ENSO events. And it only takes the cumulative effect of a very small portion (0.0045 or less than ½ of 1%) of the monthly ENSO signal, as shown in Figure 4, to reproduce the Global Sea Surface Temperature (SST) anomaly curve.
http://i42.tinypic.com/iom6ab.jpg
Figure 4
YET HOW MANY TIMES DOES THE USGCRP REPORT MENTION THE EL NINO-SOUTHERN OSCILLATION?
The USGCRP mentions “El Nino” nine times in the body of the 196-page report, but those references only pertain to global temperature on one occassion. The first reference, however, states that ENSO is independent of human activities.
On page 16, during a discussion Natural Influences, they wrote, “The climate changes that have occurred over the last century are not solely caused by the human and natural factors described above. In addition to these influences, there are also fluctuations in climate that occur even in the absence of changes in human activities, the Sun, or volcanoes. One example is the El Niño phenomenon, which has important influences on many aspects of regional and global climate.” [My emphasis.]
They acknowledged that ENSO is independent of anthropogenic influence. That’s significant.
On page 17, in the text of the comparative graph of “Global Temperature and Carbon Dioxide”, they wrote, “These year-to-year fluctuations in temperature are due to natural processes, such as the effects of El Niños, La Niñas, and the eruption of large volcanoes.” [My emphasis.]
Yet they fail to note the multiyear and cumulative effects of ENSO.
Page 36, during a discussion of Pacific Hurricanes, they write, “The total number of tropical storms and hurricanes in the eastern Pacific on seasonal to multi-decade time periods is generally opposite to that observed in the Atlantic. For example, during El Niño events it is common for hurricanes in the Atlantic to be suppressed while the eastern Pacific is more active. This reflects the large-scale atmospheric circulation patterns that extend across both the Atlantic and the Pacific oceans.” [My emphasis.]
That quote is important in many contests. Much can be inferred from it. Yet they fail to acknowledge the multidecadal epochs when El Nino or La Nina are dominant. These epochs are visible in a time-series graph of smoothed NINO3.4 SST anomalies, Figure 5.
http://i43.tinypic.com/33agh3c.jpg
Figure 5
On page 38, under the heading of Snowstorms, they wrote, “The northward shift in storm tracks is reflected in regional changes in the frequency of snowstorms. The South and lower Midwest saw reduced snowstorm frequency during the last century. In contrast, the Northeast and upper Midwest saw increases in snowstorms, although considerable decade-to-decade variations were present in all regions, influenced, for example, by the frequency of El Niño events.” [My emphasis.]
And again, they infer multidecadal influences of ENSO, but the USGCRP have failed to account for it in their attribution of global temperature change.
There are further references of El Nino and La Nina events on pages 81, 147, 148, and 152, as they pertain to tuna stock, droughts, coral reefs, and coastal currents. No need to repeat those in this post.
CLOSING
Like the IPCC, the USGCRP either fails to accept the significant multiyear and cumulative impacts of ENSO on global temperatures or they chose to ignore them in their presentation of the causes of global temperature change.
Posted by Bob Tisdale at 8:42 PM
Innocentious: You asked, “why does it remain for so long, it looks like the mid cooled down but the North stayed hot from late 1999 to mid 2001.”
The tropics cooled in response to the La Nina of 1998/99/00. That La Nina also may have, in fact, cooled the mid-to-high latitudes on the Northern Hemisphere or at least prevented it from warming more. The other question, one that I’ll turn back to you, is how quickly would we anticipate that amount of heat to dissipate? Keep in mind that it wasn’t only the troposphere that warmed. The sea surfaces warmed as well, and with the process of reemergence, some of that heat then is subducted and brought back to the surface in subsequent winters.
Mike O: You wrote, “We go to great pains to point out that correlation is not causation in theAGW debate, but then assert that El Nino drives the SST anomalies.”
IMO, any correlation between anthropogenic forcings and global temperature is a reach at best. Many of those forcings are manufactured to help GCMs reproduce the global temperature anomaly curve, something that most GCMs do rather poorly.
Back to your statement, in two prior posts here at WUWT and at my website, I’ve illustrated the PROCESS by which El Nino events raise SST anomalies. Here’s the links to my posts:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2008/12/lingering-effects-of-199798-el-nino.html
The video in that one will help illustrate the process, and the next two go into great detail to explain it further:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/01/can-el-nino-events-explain-all-of.html
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/01/can-el-nino-events-explain-all-of_11.html
As to what fuels El Nino events, refer to my comment to Mark Wagner at 07:31:34. It’s too long to repeat here. And there’s one more thing to consider. There was a shift in cloud amount in the few years before the 1997/98 El Nino, which should have helped fuel it.
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/04/did-decrease-in-total-cloud-amount-fuel.html
Regards
Gary Pearse (13:28:39) : “I’ve offered a possibility from geology – the geothermal gradient. Yes, yes it is weak on average but consider. Average 0.075W/m2 but 0.35W/m2 where? in the east-central pacific…”
I wouldn’t casually dismiss this as a player in the system. But how might this result in an oscillating system? Also, since hot water rises, wouldn’t this interact with the thermocline? Has this convection been observed by any of the Argos probes?
(formerly martin38, normal guy trying to figure this stuff out.)
If all this is true, shouldn’t there be allowances made for the retention of fresh water in the form of lakes and reservoirs across the world? Will we have to flush?
Matt V: You noted and asked, “I notice that you did not mention AMO or the NORTH ATLANTIC SST as having any effect on climate . Care to comment?”
Like all oceans, ENSO has a significant impact on the North Atlantic. Major ENSO events slow AMOC:
http://i33.tinypic.com/5cyglz.jpg
That’s figure 6 from this post on AMOC:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2008/11/atlantic-meridional-overturning.html
Significant El Nino events also cause upward step changes in North Atlantic SST anomalies:
http://i43.tinypic.com/6f72ol.jpg
Those steps are similar in magnitude to the step changes in the East Indian and West Pacific Oceans:
http://i39.tinypic.com/15cocop.jpg
Those two graphs are from my post here:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/02/there-are-also-el-nino-induced-step.html
Also, I’m working on a follow-up to my post on The Reemergence Mechanism.
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/06/reemergence-mechanism.html
There’s a significant difference between NINO SST anomalies during Jan-Feb-Mar (Northern Hemisphere Winter) and those that occur in Jul-Aug-Sep (Southern Hemisphere Winter). Now, since reemergence causes repeats in WINTERTIME SST anomalies, and since winter occurs during different times for each hemisphere, there should be a difference in the hemispheric integration of those signals. You’ll find it interesting. I’ll try to finish by the end of the week.
Gary Turner: You noted, “Should not ‘contests’ be ‘contexts’?
Thanks for nit picking. I’ve corrected it on my version.
De Rode Willem: You asked, “Why are the expected down-peek not as deep anymore as 20-30 years ago ? If we connect this down-peaks we see a clear undisputable upward trend ! The proof of global warming ?”
And that’s why I provided figures 2 and 3.
To me it’s proof that the volcanic eruptions of El Chichon and Mount Pinatubo in 1982 and 1991 reduced global TLT in the early part of the graph. There are also two upward step changes that result from the 1986/87/88 and 1997/98 El Ninos.
Regards
Leif: You wrote, “If one of the things [humans] is not causing ENSO, then the other things the report says are not causing ENSO [the sun and volcanoes] are just as true. Of course, it could be that the whole thing is nonsense, and the report has no credibility, but, please, don’t cherry pick.”
I acknowledge the cherry pick. Thanks for pointing it out and clarifying. I’ll rewrite it.
Regards.
Leif Svalgaard
RE the solar connection with Earths climate and its possible relation to ENSO:
Here is the viewpoint of Jack Eddy as reported at http://www.lowell.edu/users/jch/sss/blog/.
“Were God to give us, at last, the cable, or patch-cord that links the Sun to the climate system it would have on the solar end a banana plug, and on the other, where it hooks into the Earth — in ways we don’t yet know — a Hydra-like tangle of multiple 24-pin parallel computer connectors. It is surely at this end of the problem where the greatest challenges lie.”
That seems to be a reasonable attitude to begin with don’t you think? Acknowledge the challenge and start chasing the connections.
Surely a good place to begin is with solar modulation of ozone in the stratosphere. Change in ozone concentration in the stratosphere is linked with change in sea surface temperature i.e ENSO
Linked is too weak a term. Call it ‘locked in’.
Bob Tisdale:
Thanks once again for bringing to the attention of concerned people the point that ENSO is natural climate change in action. Until we know the dynamics behind the cycling of tropical temperature we are in no position to quantify the effect of ENSO on regional and global climate.
We are certainly in no position to derive any ‘anthropogenic’ contribution as a remainder.
Yep. The report measures roughly 9.8 on the gall meter.
Trade winds fluctuate much more than the Sun does. They also fluctuate much more than CO2 does. There are several websites that record trade wind strength. Currently, trade winds are down somewhat from their earlier strength during the height of the La Nina we just finished. Trade winds are the winds that are drawn toward the Coriolis and end up in an upward North to the Equator/South to the Equator, and then East to West flow.
Jorgekafkazar (12:54:23)
Spelling only counts here on the fifth Friday of the month, Jim.
Thanks but it’s still to much pressure.
When seawater cools from, say, 80°F to 65°F, its viscosity rises by almost 25 percent. I’m pretty sure that the major cause of ENSO is that East Pacific upwelling reaches a point where the seawater surface viscosity becomes too high for the trades to hold westward, resulting in a shift towards the east. I’m not sure the trades slacken much; they’re driven by the earth’s rotation plus coriolis forces, which don’t cycle. But the mechanism I propose above is necessarily cyclical. As the East Pacific warm temperatures are restored, the sea surface viscosity drops, and the trades can then sweep water westward again.
Note: There may be related atmospheric factors due to cooling and the resulting lower humidities above the upwelled water.
The trade winds slacken enough and the forcing of kelvin and RG waves do a number on the subsurface/SST’s if the deck is stacked for a while. So the solar connection is obviously indirectly related to this. But trying to fill in the gaps with all the chicken – egg variables is no easy task.
But I feel very confident with my methodology and I wouldn’t be a the verge of properly forecasting the ENSO pattern for the fifth consectutive year in a row if my methods were flawed or without some foundation basis.
And I was on a forecasting hiatus before hand so that should not be a knock against me. But I also forecasted events prior to 2000. And many individuals within the meteorological community have been aware of these forecasts.
@ur momisugly Bob Tisdale
I’m trying to catch up with the whole climate picture not only with ENSO issue. I have just ended reading your texts:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/01/can-el-nino-events-explain-all-of.html
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/01/can-el-nino-events-explain-all-of_11.html
During the closing paragraph of the second part you wrote:
CLOSING
(…) The other major point of this post was that the heat distribution associated with El Nino events did not occur for all of El Ninos since 1976. The El Chichon and Mount Pinatubo explosive volcanic eruptions suppressed the heat distribution of the 1982/83, the 1991/92, the 1993, and possibly the 1994/95 ENSO events.
Looking at your images and keeping in mind your remarks one thing is striking – namely, that suppression of the heat dissipation resembles in nature the work of lasers.
Lasing medium is kept between two mirrors – one is reflecting light (or EM waves) in 100% to enhance lasing effect, the other in 50% as sort of safety valve. When the lasing events within medium crosses a certain level the laser beam emerges from the half-transparent window.
The volcanic suppression of the aforementioned global scale heat dissipation has led to similar event – above normal La-Nina in 97/98 (burst of laser beam/pulse). If PWP is such a gigantic energy container as you say no wonder one day it erupted with event which has driven global temperature so high for so long. Let’s call the phenomenon Pacific Lasing Phenomenon (PLP). 🙂
Is that plausible?
Regards
Przemysław Pawełczyk: I have an extremely limited knowldge of lasers, so I can’t answer your closing question.
Regards.
Lasers, “plugged” volcanoes, plugged simmering kettles, etc. behave the same way in certain conditions and all deal with energy.
ENSO deals with energy. It is kind of black box with inlet and outlet. If you plug the outlet and keep the inlet open, climate vocabulary is replete with expressions with “forcing” suffixes, you will achieve soon the state close to “explosion”. When natural time had come for El-Nino it generated all the “simmering” energy accumulated through the times of “suppression” (Pinatubo, etc). 97/98 was the time.
Perhaps if one found an equation(s) describing the energy box’s behavior he’d be able to predict bigger La-Nina events in the future. Providing there were “factors” which created conditions for the suppressions.
But, well, it were only layman’s musing…
Regards
Jim Hughes (16:23:39) : “The trade winds slacken enough and the forcing of kelvin and RG waves do a number on the subsurface/SST’s if the deck is stacked for a while. So the solar connection is obviously indirectly related to this. But trying to fill in the gaps with all the chicken – egg variables is no easy task.”
Very true. The system is replete with cause-effect/ effect-cause ‘intertwinglings’, as Dick Smothers used to say. Finding valid predictors among all this is like looking for a roulette-wheel ‘system’ that actually works. Here’s hoping for a sixth year of continued success!
Pamela Gray (16:03:37) : “Trade winds fluctuate much more than the Sun does…There are several websites that record trade wind strength. Currently, trade winds are down somewhat from their earlier strength during the height of the La Nina we just finished.”
But do the tradewinds slacken because of friction with stiffer water, or does the water move eastward because of weaker tradewinds? Which comes first, the Chichon or the Egg?
erlhapp (15:33:50) :
Change in ozone concentration in the stratosphere is linked with change in sea surface temperature i.e ENSO
If that were the case, I would change my assessment this moment, but unfortunately it ain’t.
What about Thedor Landscheit an his thesis?
http://www.john-daly.com/sun-enso/revisit.htm
http://www.john-daly.com/theodor/DecadalEnso.htm
“The next LPCZ in 2080 is sufficiently far away. In the next few decades the pattern shown in Figure 3 should be free of instabilities of any kind. So I expect a decadal minimum in El Niño intensity around 2007 (GPTC), a maximum around 2025 (LPTC), and further minimum around 2044 (GPTC). As can be read from Figure 3, these phases help to fix the timing, not the amplitude of the respective extremum. ”
“Here the LPCZs come in and a new factor marked in Figure 3 by filled circles at the top. They indicate rare retrograde phases in the Sun’s motion (RS) going along with negative orbital angular momentum. In my paper “Extrema in sunspot cycle linked to Sun’s motion” (Landscheidt, 1999) I have shown that they go along with accumulations of extreme eruptional activity on the Sun. This is important as the effect of the set of solar motion cycles of different length is not based on relatively weak variations in solar irradiance, but on the Sun’s energetic eruptional activity which has a strong impact on climate. As to details I refer to chapter 4 of my paper “Long-range forecast of U.S. drought based on solar activity (Landscheidt, 2003 a).”
“It is easy to see from Figure 3 that all instances of peak intensity are grouped around LPCZ and RS epochs. All periods of protracted weak intensity fall in between these epochs. So the PC phases in 2007 and 2025 should go along with amplitudes as indicated by the respective triangles, and the minimum intensity around 2044 should have a large negative amplitude. Overall, up to about 2060, strong El Niños like in 1982/1983 and 1997/1998 should not occur, but strong La Niñas are to be expected. Only after 2060 and with the highest probability around 2080 accumulations of strong El Niños should emerge again.”
Thank you, Bob. Another case of a picture is worth a 1000 words (although the words really help). This also ties in arctic and antarctic ice observations.
erlhapp (15:33:50) :
“Change in ozone concentration in the stratosphere is linked with change in sea surface temperature i.e ENSO
If that were the case, I would change my assessment this moment, but unfortunately it ain’t.”
Then let me respectfully submit this graph that covers the Indian and Pacific Oceans from Sumatra through to Chile: http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg220/erlandlong/SSTand20hPa.jpg
Data is in each case a 12 month moving average centered on the 7th month.
Source: NCEP/NCAR Reanalysis.
Sea surface temperature is shown for each latitude band between the equator and 50°S.
Representing the stratosphere (and its ozone content) we have 20hPa temperature 10°N to 10°S. It can be shown that change in stratospheric temperature and ozone content is initiated at the highest altitude and at the poles and propagates both downwards and towards the equator, the temperature curves losing complexity as it does so, ultimately morphing into the sine wave like pattern that manifests in this 20hPa data. So, the particular form and pattern of 20hPa temperature at any latitude depends upon the degree of atmospheric mixing. This has a damping and simplifying effect.
In interpreting the graph please consider that a strong cooling cycle can deliver declining SST at the equator whilst SST rises simultaneously at higher latitudes. This can give rise to a situation where there appears to be no response at the equator or the response is late. I have marked some notable instances where this occurs with LN standing for “La Nina”.
Please be aware that temperature peaks in the stratosphere at latitudes remote from the equator usually precede those at the equator and the lag is variable.
It can be shown that the peaks in temperature in the stratosphere are associated with peaks in 200hPa temperature in the upper troposphere.
Notice the striking rise in 20hPa temperature that is associated with the 1978-83 climate shift when SST at the equator jumped by about half a degree.
Notice also an equivalent striking rise in 20hPa temperature prior to the 1978 El Nino and its association with rising sea surface temperature at 20-30° south. It commences early 1995.
Here is the QBO propagating from high latitudes: http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg220/erlandlong/QBOathighLat.jpg
And here is a picture of me presenting myself for another ducking. http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg220/erlandlong/Jedda.jpg
erlhapp (06:10:37) :
“Change in ozone concentration in the stratosphere is linked with change in sea surface temperature i.e ENSO
If that were the case, I would change my assessment this moment, but unfortunately it ain’t.”
Then let me respectfully submit this graph
This is just some wiggle matching that is not convincing or even comprehensible. You posit a relationship between ozone concentration and SST, so plot SST versus O3.
Perhaps Bob Tisdale [or others] could specifically comment on your proposed regulator for ENSO, on the mechanism proposed, on the evidence presented. As usual, you overwhelm with details that blur the focus.
Tallbloke:
Thanks for including me in such a prestigious group, but I have to say I’m skeptical of some of the correlations you may have found. The correlation since 1975 only exists because of the timing of the 1976, 1986/7, and 1997/8 events, along with the eruptions of Pinatubo and El Chichon. Solar cycles 19 and 20 may only correlate with SST because of the eruption of Agung. So a combination of the step-changes associated with El Nino events and volcanic eruptions seem to have caused SST to show some correlation to SSN over the past five solar cycles. However, ask Erl, and he might tell you it’s no coincidence that those El Nino events occured when they did in relation to the solar cycles. I have more sympathy for Erl’s position than I do for a simple, solar maximum=significantly more radiation theory. It just doesn’t show up in the data. This prolonged, deep minimum has been a test for this kind of solar theory, and SST aren’t falling below what is expected from the ENSO conditions. In fact, SST and ENSO have been way above what is expected from the SOI – which was very positive during the second half of the past couple years of La Nina conditions. (http://www.eldersweather.com.au/climimage.jsp?i=soi)
I’m really hoping we don’t leave this minimum for awhile. If the sun remains inactive for much longer, and SST still does not respond, the solar cycle theory of climate is gonna have a lot of explaining to do.
Leif, 07:10:38.
The focus is blurred from the complexity of the relationship. The devil and the truth are in the details. Carry on, you two.
==============================================
Leif Svalgaard wrote, “Perhaps Bob Tisdale [or others] could specifically comment on your proposed regulator for ENSO, on the mechanism proposed, on the evidence presented.”
Sorry. Erl Happ’s areas of study are outside of mine.