Here is the current SST map:
From NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center:
EL NIÑO/SOUTHERN OSCILLATION (ENSO) DIAGNOSTIC DISCUSSION issued by CLIMATE PREDICTION CENTER/NCEP/NWS
10 September 2009
ENSO Alert System Status: El Niño Advisory
Synopsis: El Niño is expected to strengthen and last through the Northern Hemisphere winter 2009-2010. A weak El Niño continued during August 2009, as sea surface temperature (SST) remained above-average across the equatorial Pacific Ocean (Fig. 1).
Consistent with this warmth, the latest weekly values of the Niño-region SST indices were between +0.7°C to +1.0°C (Fig. 2).
![Figure 2. Time series of area-averaged sea surface temperature (SST) anomalies (°C) in the Niño regions [Niño-1+2 (0°-10°S, 90°W-80°W), Niño 3 (5°N-5°S, 150°W-90°W), Niño-3.4 (5°N-5°S, 170°W- 120°W), Niño-4 (150ºW-160ºE and 5ºN-5ºS)]. SST anomalies are departures from the 1971-2000 base period weekly means (Xue et al. 2003, J. Climate, 16, 1601-1612).](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/noaa_enso_fig2.png?quality=75 "NOAA_Enso_fig2")
Subsurface oceanic heat content (average temperatures in the upper 300m of the ocean, Fig. 3) anomalies continued to reflect a
deep layer of anomalous warmth between the ocean surface and the thermocline, particularly in the
central Pacific (Fig. 4).
Enhanced convection over the western and central Pacific abated during the month, but the pattern of suppressed convection strengthened over Indonesia. Low-level westerly wind anomalies continued to become better established over parts of the equatorial Pacific Ocean. These oceanic and atmospheric anomalies reflect an ongoing weak El Niño.
A majority of the model forecasts for the Niño-3.4 SST index (Fig. 5) suggest El Niño will reach at least moderate strength during the Northern Hemisphere fall (3-month Niño-3.4 SST index of +1.0°C or greater). Many model forecasts even suggest a strong El Niño (3-month Niño-3.4 SST index in excess of +1.5°C) during the fall and winter, but current observations and trends indicate that El Niño will most likely peak at moderate strength. Therefore, current conditions, trends, and model forecasts favor the
continued development of a weak-to-moderate strength El Niño into the Northern Hemisphere fall 2009, with the likelihood of at least a moderate strength El Niño during the winter 2009-10.
Expected El Niño impacts during September-November 2009 include enhanced precipitation over the west-central tropical Pacific Ocean and the continuation of drier-than-average conditions over Indonesia. Temperature and precipitation impacts over the United States are typically weak during the Northern Hemisphere summer and early fall, generally strengthening during the late fall and winter. El Niño can help to suppress Atlantic hurricane activity by increasing the vertical wind shear over the Caribbean Sea and tropical Atlantic Ocean (see the Aug. 6th update of the NOAA Atlantic Seasonal Hurricane Outlook ).
This discussion is a consolidated effort of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), NOAA’s National Weather Service, and their funded institutions. Oceanic and atmospheric conditions are updated weekly on the Climate Prediction Center web site (El Niño/La Niña Current Conditions and Expert Discussions). Forecasts for the evolution of El Niño/La Niña are updated monthly in the Forecast Forum section of CPC’s Climate Diagnostics Bulletin. The next ENSO Diagnostics Discussion is scheduled for 8 October 2009. To receive an e-mail notification when the monthly ENSO Diagnostic Discussions are released, please send an e-mail message to: ncep.list.ensoupdate@noaa.gov
(source: PDF)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Re: erlhapp (04:03:13)
–
If you are making your graphs in Excel, just click, double-click, & right-click all features on your graphs to discover a wide variety of adjustment options. (Larger, bold text can be obtained in just a few seconds, with just a few clicks.)
–
Thanks for the notes Erl.
What I find particularly interesting is the connection with geomagnetic activity. What I have found for coastal British Columbia, Canada (the area I research) is that while interannual precipitation relates to ENSO for years-at-a-time, there are intervals when it shows a relationship with interannual geomagnetic aa index (which I estimate by filtering off the main solar cycle signal in the aa index record). [I’m not suggesting interannual aa index is a causative factor — it might be confounded with something else – that is a matter for the physicists to ponder.]
I have been having success in using EOP (Earth orientation parameters) to identify intervals with differing dynamics. The arguments that celestial bodies do not affect Earth climate are based on flawed assumptions. (See the works of Russian scientist Yu.V. Barkin for details.)
Related: I’ve been reading up on annular modes (good notes here http://ao.atmos.colostate.edu/introduction.html btw [with notes about stratosphere/troposphere coupling]). Your comments in these threads have helped me realize the importance of the polar vortices — thank you.
Paul,
Thanks for the suggestions. I can amend the titles and the key easily but I think the WordPress format that we are using is generally too small.
Re British Columbia rainfall: I find this image showing the ever changing distribution of precipitable water of continuing interest. http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/extreme/gfs/current/plan_water_000.png
British Columbia is the recipient of a strong flow of moisture from the maritime Continent and local dynamics must also be strongly affected by the strength of Arctic, Canadian and East Asian downdraft zones.
For visible high and low cloud cover and the way the former is fed from the main centres of convection this imagery found via links at the head of this thread is worth pondering http://www.intelliweather.net/imagery/intelliweather/sat_worldm_640x320_img.htm If you look carefully you can see the high cloud simply disappearing in the zones of greatest downdraft. See the zone to the east of Chile and also Baja California.
Rainfall outside the tropics depends upon evaporation within the tropics. East Australian rainfall has been increasing for 100 years as the tropics have gradually warmed. West Australian Rainfall has declined as the frontal systems have been pushed further south. This seems to be reversing over the last decade. The Southern hemisphere is in general pretty cold at the moment with a long sustained winter.
There is a seasonal change in the temperature and evaporation rate from tropical waters and a change on top of that which is is due to ENSO. Because temperatures in the stratosphere/upper troposphere affect albedo (and therefore SST) and do so unequally (more at some latitudes and longitudes than others and moreover this distribution changing over time) the ENSO effect on equatorial waters is similarly variable over time. Variability in ENSO reflects the original variability in the polar vortexes, the mesosphere and the sun. Both irradiance and geomagnetic activity are implicated in the change in mesospheric nitrogen oxides so the geomagnetic indices tell us about just one of the variables involved. The strength of the vortexes very probably depend upon solar influences as well (because much of the atmosphere carries an electric charge and behaves like a plasma responding to the solar wind) but also I would think surface influences relating to the strength of tropical and hemispheric convection.
The notion that ENSO is an ‘internal oscillation’ which is temperature neutral in terms of its effect on the Earths heat budget reveals a pathetic lack of appreciation of the linkages involved. ENSO is reflects natural climate variability in action.
Sandy, I have no argument about what you remark on in the zone of inter-tropical convergence. However, much of that cooling in that near equatorial zone is due to decompression and is balanced by warming due to compression in the subtropical zones of descending air. The heat is moved from one place in the atmosphere to another. This is in turn reflected in maps of outgoing long wave radiation. It is in these latter zones and their margins (and the mid and high latitudes) that strong albedo effects are found. I see little role for albedo effects at or near the equator except that the zone of maximum convection shifts along the equator. Indonesia is wet during La Nina and dry during El Nino.
Sandy, if you want documentation on the changing level of moisture in the atmosphere you can access it it at:http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/data/timeseries/timeseries1.pl
In particular look at specific humidity levels.
If what I say is irrelevant to your point please tell me.
erlhapp (20:09:17) ” http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/extreme/gfs/current/plan_water_000.png “
Thanks for that link Erl. I looked at the images in the higher directory:
http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/extreme/gfs/current/
Fascinating. Along with the various “water” plots, the plots labeled “wind_swath” are particularly interesting.
“erlhapp (03:16:04) :
Stephen,
Re: “It must be the case that the oceans absorb or release energy to the air at variable rates depending upon movements within the body of the water.”
Warmest water will always be at the top because it is less dense and the energy transmission rate will vary with wind strength because of its effect on evaporation. Wind strength does not, as far as I know, vary on thirty year time scales.
The atmosphere can not function as a variable inhibitor of the loss of surface warmth.”
Repy:
1) Warmest water will always be at the top because the effect of direct insolation and downwelling IR is always added to the background energy level at or near the ocean surface. However sunlight gets into the water to depths of 100 metres or more which is well below the region involved in evaporation. Thus there is plenty of scope for an uneven and constantly shifting distribution of energy below the evaporative layer. Each time such unevenness affects the surface layer it will increase or decrease the total energy at the surface by adding to or subtracting from the effects of direct insolation and downwelling IR. Furthermore the density of water and it’s thermal capacity will ensure that such internal oceanic variations in energy flow will vastly exceed any variability in insolation or downwelling IR.
2) An increase in wind strength generally follows an increase in energy at the ocean surface rather than leading it. When more energy is released by the oceans the entire hydrological cycle speeds up as shown in another thread by the lag curves set out by Roy Spencer. First evaporation, then clouds and rain and then windiness. You seem to be suggesting that windiness comes first but I cannot see how that could be so because more windiness needs more convective activity which in turn needs more evaporation which itself needs warmer ocean surfaces first.
3) On 30 year timescales (approximately) in tune with ocean phase changes the entire hydrological cycle speeds up or slows down as the air circulation systems shift poleward or equatorward. The windiness in a specific location or region may not be typical of the global effect because each location or region is primarily affected by the change in it’s location in relation to the air circulation patterns and not by the global change in windiness. Thus larger equatorial air masses globally may well show less windiness in the tropics and other places affected by high pressure cells but nonetheless the global speed of the hydrological cycle has increased with greater global windiness overall.
4) I must insist that the air can and does provide a variable and always negative response to changes in the rate of energy release by the oceans. I judge that the oceanic variation and the negative response in the air are orders of magnitude greater in terms of the scale of energy transfer than anything that can happen in the air alone. Thus the processes you observe are in my opinion merely second or third order modulating effects within the overall ocean/air interaction and are never strong enough to alter the trend imposed by oceanic variability. AGW and the Svensmark approach have the same problem.
You can counter what I say if you can demonstrate how the processes described by you can inject enough energy into the oceans to create those 25 to 30 year phase changes in relation to which I see no correlation with the processes you describe, or the cosmic ray variability or indeed CO2 increases.
Stephen
You say and I agree:
“However sunlight gets into the water to depths of 100 metres or more which is well below the region involved in evaporation. Thus there is plenty of scope for an uneven and constantly shifting distribution of energy below the evaporative layer.”
And it is the sunlight that provides the energy for the evaporation and the wind, the ocean currents and the atmospheric circulation.
Take away the sunlight and the circulations will come to a halt.
The variation in the circulations relate to fluctuation in the energy received at the surface. As the atmosphere above 200hPa (that contains ozone) warms so does the surface. As it cools so does the surface. This is an immutable fact. It is not speculation. Furthermore, the increase in temperature in the atmosphere is double or triple that at the surface so the change in the atmosphere can not be a response to change at the surface. The atmosphere increases in temperature in response to a change in its ozone content.
Very simple. Nothing convoluted about this at all.
The atmosphere contains water vapour. As it warms cloud disappears. Simple as that. Then more energy gets to the surface. And this happens at all latitudes.