I’m sure the press will make this into a much bigger story. This today from NOAA News. The choice of “hottest” in the title is interesting. We should ask our Canadian friends if it was “hot” during March, since Canada seems to be leading the world in “hotness” according to the NOAA image. – Anthony
NOAA: Global Temps Push Last Month to Hottest March on Record
The world’s combined global land and ocean surface temperature made last month the warmest March on record, according to NOAA. Taken separately, average ocean temperatures were the warmest for any March and the global land surface was the fourth warmest for any March on record. Additionally, the planet has seen the fourth warmest January – March period on record.
The monthly National Climatic Data Center analysis, which is based on records going back to 1880, is part of the suite of climate services NOAA provides government, business and community leaders so they can make informed decisions.
Global Temperature Highlights – March 2010
Temperature anomaly is the difference from average, which gives a more accurate picture of temperature change. In calculating average regional temperatures, factors like station location or elevation affect the data, but those factors are less critical when looking at the difference from the average.
High resolution (Credit: NOAA/National Climatic Data Center/NESDIS)
- The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for March 2010 was the warmest on record at 56.3°F (13.5°C), which is 1.39°F (0.77°C) above the 20th century average of 54.9°F (12.7°C).
- The worldwide ocean surface temperature was the highest for any March on record –1.01°F (0.56°C) above the 20th century average of 60.7°F (15.9°C).
- Separately, the global land surface temperature was 2.45°F (1.36°C) above the 20th century average of 40.8 °F (5.0°C) — the fourth warmest on record. Warmer-than-normal conditions dominated the globe, especially in northern Africa, South Asia and Canada. Cooler-than-normal regions included Mongolia and eastern Russia, northern and western Europe, Mexico, northern Australia, western Alaska and the southeastern United States.
- El Niño weakened to moderate strength in March, but it contributed significantly to the warmth in the tropical belt and the overall ocean temperature. According to NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center, El Niño is expected to continue its influence in the Northern Hemisphere at least through the spring.
- For the year-to-date, the combined global land- and ocean-surface temperature of 55.3°F (13.0°C) was the fourth warmest for a January-March period. This value is 1.19°F (0.66°C) above the 20th century average.
- According to the Beijing Climate Center, Tibet experienced its second warmest March since historical records began in 1951. Delhi, India also had its second warmest March since records began in 1901, according to the India Meteorological Department.
Other Highlights
Download additional information and resources.
Download PDF (Credit: NOAA/National Climatic Data Center/NESDIS)
- Arctic sea ice covered an average of 5.8 million square miles (15.1 million square kilometers) during March. This is 4.1 percent below the 1979-2000 average expanse, and the fifth-smallest March coverage since records began in 1979. Ice coverage traditionally reaches its maximum in March, and this was the 17th consecutive March with below-average Arctic sea ice coverage. This year the Arctic sea ice reached its maximum size on March 31st, the latest date for the maximum Arctic sea ice extent since satellite records began in 1979.
- Antarctic sea ice expanse in March was 6.9 percent below the 1979-2000 average, resulting in the eighth smallest March ice coverage on record.
- In China, the Xinjiang province had its wettest March since records began in 1951, while Jilin and Shanghai had their second wettest March on record. Meanwhile, Guangxi and Hainan provinces in southern China experienced their driest March on record, according to the Beijing Climate Center.
- Many locations across Ontario, Canada received no snow, or traces of snow, in March, which set new low snowfall records, according to Environment Canada.
Scientists, researchers, and leaders in government and industry use NOAA’s monthly reports to help track trends and other changes in the world’s climate. This climate service has a wide range of practical uses, from helping farmers know what and when to plant, to guiding resource managers with critical decisions about water, energy and other vital assets.
NOAA understands and predicts changes in the Earth’s environment, from the depths of the oceans to surface of the sun, and conserves and manages our coastal and marine resources.
@ur momisugly Anu (09:40:31) :
But the trend is not significant. You don’t have thirty years of data. This could be your missing heat, or not. How does heat in the ocean behave at this depth historically?
If it is found, as you seem to think, why are Trenberth et al still pondering out loud about where it has gone?
mikael pihlström (03:41:28) :
Dave Wendt (17:22:26) :
“They also reinforce the point made by myself and several others on a number of occasions that no one ever gets to experience climate, just weather.”
Dave, it is dangerous way of thinking. When, the next Ice age comes, are
you getting to experience weather or climate? It only needs 5-7 degrees (C) change in global mean temperature – and then the people you refer to will
say, ´’oh it’s so much less than the difference than between early morning and mid-noon any summer day in Texas.
MY bad. I thought from the tone of your comments you were suggesting we all need to get our knickers in a twist over 1-3 degrees of warming globally. If I’d realized you actually had evidence that we are imminently facing 5-7 degrees of global cooling, I’d have been the first in line to saddle up with your alarmist cavalry and fight, like the “600” of old, to the last man to oppose it.
Dave F (10:05:22) :
@ur momisugly Anu (09:40:31) :
But the trend is not significant. You don’t have thirty years of data. This could be your missing heat, or not. How does heat in the ocean behave at this depth historically?
They already have a 55 year old trend of increasing ocean heat, looking at the upper 700 meters:
http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/
Why are there some periods of “constant” heat in this thin upper layer ? Why is there sometimes a large jump in ocean heat in this thin upper layer (2002-2004, 1972-1975, 1995-1997) ? The fact that looking to 2000 meters for one six year section of that 55 year graph shows warming where the 700 m graph does not, is significant in itself.
Sure, it would be nice to have 55 years, or 100 years, of 3000m data. And it would be nice to be a billionaire, too.
The new Argo data looking at the upper 2000m gives a possible explanation for the wide swings in 700m data – heat is being moved vertically, in upwellings and downwellings, that hadn’t been seen before in the instrument data.
The first Argo floats were deployed in late 1999.
The Argo array did not reach its full planned coverage of at least 3000 floats until late 2006. Not all the floats are equal – about 66% dive to at least 1500 meters, and 46% to 2000 meters.
If it is found, as you seem to think, why are Trenberth et al still pondering out loud about where it has gone?
The von Schuckmann research has only found a bit more than half of the “missing” heat.
Trenberth is Director of the Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colorado. He has argued repeatedly that they need better measurements of Earth’s climate, to track where all this extra energy being trapped by the CO2 is going. For the oceans, he would like the Argo system to be expanded – bigger array, more floats going deeper. Trenberth et al has already said
They are probably downplaying the von Schuckmann results because the full array was not in place for the six years of the study, and they are emphasizing that better data is still needed – the Argo system is not “finished”.
Of course, when they get the first 10 years of great, high resolution, down to 3000 meter data showing exactly where the radiation-imbalance-extra-heat entering the oceans surface is flowing to, for the entire oceans even under the sea ice,
people like you will say “but that’s only 10 years data. We need 30 years to see the trend”.
Not if every improvement in measuring the oceans continues to show OHC building up and agreeing more and more with the satellite measurements of energy imbalance. This is “improved measurement of an existing trend”.
http://w3.jcommops.org/FTPRoot/Argo/Doc/Argo_new_brochure.pdf
Prospects for the Future
Many important climate processes take place in the frozen areas of the ocean.
Standard Argo floats cannot operate under ice but acoustically tracked floats
that store the temperature/salinity profiles and transmit them in spring
have been used in the Antarctic.
Argo floats cannot operate over the steep continental slope, nor can the
array adequately measure the oceans’ narrow and swift western boundary
currents. Here autonomous gliders integrated with Argo will help to link the
deep ocean to the boundary currents and continental shelves. The Argo data
system can also handle data from gliders.
Ocean measurements will get better and better – don’t be surprised when they show exactly where all that extra heat is going.
Personally, I’d like to see these under-sea-ice floats. How much of the warming oceans is ending up in the Arctic Ocean ? I bet heat is entering between Iceland and Great Britain…
“I bet heat is entering between Iceland and Great Britain…”
Yes Anu, from volcanoes; 🙂
Why are there some periods of “constant” heat in this thin upper layer ? Why is there sometimes a large jump in ocean heat in this thin upper layer (2002-2004, 1972-1975, 1995-1997) ? The fact that looking to 2000 meters for one six year section of that 55 year graph shows warming where the 700 m graph does not, is significant in itself.
True, it is significant, but offers no answers to the questions you ask yourself.
Sunlight can only penetrate the ocean to 100m, roundabout.
Why is the ocean heat content at 2km important to surface temperature?
Why is the ocean heat content at 2km important to surface temperature?
Why is the ocean heat content at 0.7km important to surface temperature ?
Because the “surface” water is not always the same water – as I said, there are lots of currents in the ocean, in all 3 dimensions.
How did the extra heat get down to 2 km, anyway ?
Because of ocean currents.
Why will this affect surface temperatures ? Because ocean currents form closed loops – heated surface water downwells, heated deep water eventually upwells. To start the loop again.
What happens when the cold water from the oceans depths starts the surface portion of its loop 0.1°C warmer than the last time this water was on the surface ? The SST has gone up.
There are plenty of different loops, of different periods and locations. The pattern of warmer water upwelling will be complicated. Trenberth wants to measure all this in higher 2D resolution, and at greater depths.
And ask yourself – why is the surface heating up in the first place ?