Recent Variations In Upper Ocean Heat Content – Information From Phil Klotzbach
By Dr. Roger Pielke Senior
Phil Klotzbach has graciously permitted me to post an update on upper ocean heat content in the equatorial upper ocean. He writes
“The Climate Prediction Center recently released its equatorial upper ocean heat content for April 2010. One of the primary areas that they focus on is the equatorial heat content averaged over the area from 180-100W. The decrease in upper ocean heat content from March to April was 1C, which is the largest decrease in equatorial upper ocean heat content in this area since the CPC began keeping records of this in 1979. The upwelling phase of a Kelvin wave was likely somewhat responsible for this significant cooling. It seems like just about every statistical and dynamical model is calling for ENSO to dissipate over the next month or two as well, so it’s probable that we will see a transition to neutral conditions shortly. I have attached a spreadsheet showing upper ocean heat content data from CPC since 1979. In case you’re interested, the correlation between April upper ocean heat content from 180-100W and August-October Nino 3.4 is an impressive 0.75 over the years from 1979-2009.
He has plotted the data below. An interesting question is to where this heat has gone.
It could have moved north and south in the upper ocean, however, to the extent the sea surface temperature anomalies map to the upper ocean heat content, there is no evidence of large heat transfers except, perhaps, in the tropical Atlantic [see].
The heat could have been transferred deeper into the ocean. However, if this is true, this heat would have been seen moving to lower levels, but, so far, there is no evidence of such a large vertical heat transfer.
The heat could, of course, be lost to space. This appears to be the most likely explanation.
Could this be the beginning of the 20 years of cooling that some predict we will endure?
Could the oceans work some kind of cycle redistributing heat energy?
Very interesting.
If things keep on going like these I think Sarah Palin will find a warm place for Al Baby, next to her mashed potatoes, along with other endangered species.
Chris
It’s a flawed argument, I’m afraid. The ‘feeling’ of cold tiled floor comes from its’ ability to conducted heat efficiently away from your little totsies. My house is totally tiled floors. When the sun hits them they become warm very quickly but because it is local heat it dissipates rapidly through the rest of the tiles.
Gates
Just because your ‘its a travesty’ high priest says that hot water goes down it doesn’t mean that the water will defy the laws of physics in favour of your religion. The oceans have very distinct layers of water at very different temp much like the atmosphere where mixing between layers is miniscule.
@ur momisugly Stevengoddard
WE HAVE STOLEN THE MISSING HEAT (sorry about that!).
Here in the Laurentians, about 120 km north of Montreal, we had the mildest winter in memory, spring came 4-6 weeks early. I mowed the lawn today (first time ever before June 1st) and all of the plants in the rock garden are out and growing.
Possibly some has gone to melting those glaciers, as we know that it would take a lot of heat to finish them off in 35 years or so…..lol
Enneagram
May 7 2010 12.48 pm
The poleward and equatorward shifts in the jets and the ITCZ beyond normal seasonal variability depend on the interplay of two opposing forces.
An increase in energy release from the ocean surfaces pushes them poleward whilst a decrease pulls them back equatorward
and simultaneously:
An increase in energy loss to space pulls them poleward whilst a decrease pushes them equtorward. This latter effect is a consequence of the contraction or expansion of the polar high pressure cells involved in the polar oscillations.
The mechanism whereby solar activity levels affect the polar oscillations (if indeed they do so ) is open for investigation as per the suggestions of Vuk and others. However the most persuasive mechanism I have found so far was kindly supplied by Leif Svalgaard :
http://www.leif.org/EOS/2009GL041845.pdf
The essence of the article is that the diurnal coming and going of sunlight creates irregularities in the energy flow or flux from troposphere right up into the exosphere.
It follows that similar effects must occur from any solar variability on all timescales.
Yes, this year will be the fourth consecutive year of below than normal sea temperatures, it’s sooo nice come summer I’m sure.
I’m not sure how many consecutive years of below normal sea levels we’ll have this year, but I know one thing though that a person once built a two foot high solid stone separation between the ocean and his land due to “dangerous consecutive raising sea levels” but for the last some 60 odd years there’s been about a yard and a half of beach in front of that probably very expensive project. Apparently the sea level rise is very geographically selective, it has always risen they say, but in every other place you’ve been at. Have you been in the indian ocean this year? Yes? God damnit, really angry murmur!!! How about the black sea?
Roger:
As someone who does thermodynamics for a living, I HATE seeing heat content given in units of degrees Celsius. The correct units are Joules, and somewhere in there you need a heat capacity.
“The heat could, of course, be lost to space. This appears to be the most likely explanation.”
R. Gates says:
“Why is this most likely? With the stratosphere showing a net continuous cooling for many decades, such heat would have to pass through the stratosphere, and THIS is what there is no evidence for. In fact, losing this heat to space is the most un-likely explanation.”
Heat RADIATING through the thin stratospheric atmosphere will not heat the stratosphere much and may be cancelled out by other factors.
This may explain the high UAH numbers, as it appears the oceans continue to exhaust heat energy into space. This perfectly with how ENSO works. Both Rossby and Kelvin waves assit in the El Nino/La Nina cycles. What will be very interesting to see is if La Nina will develope next year per Bob Tisdale’s projections.
Pat Franks asked:
“I remain a little confused about how heat can be, “transferred deeper into the ocean.” Warmer waters are typically less dense waters, and will rise toward the surface. So, what’s the mechanism for transferring heat against the buoyancy gradient?”
——–
The rising and falling of waters in the oceans is based on both heat and salinity gradients. In general of course warm waters rise and cold dense water falls creating a constant cycling of energy transfer in the oceans we find in large currents both laterally and horizontally. In the context of these large “mixing” currents, heat can get pulled down, not by thermo or salinity gradient, obviously, but by the kinetic motion of the cells themselves. Think of throwing a small plastic ball off of a waterfall. Though the ball might be less dense than the water, and will eventually rise up to the top, the initial kinetic energy of the all the water moving in the same direction can easily pull the ball down under water. Translate this to the very large amount of kinetic energy present in the currents of the world oceans, and you can see how that huge amount of momentum can easily work to pull warm water to deeper levels..and eventually this warmer water will find its way back to the surface and some out into the atmosphere. And of course, with the presence of greenhouse gases, much of that longwave energy that does go back into the atmosphere will once again go back to the sea and land, to start the cycle again.
If Ice concentration is an indication, currents are an interesting conduit. Are the NOAA buoy water temperature records logged along with air temperature for monthly comparison? I couldn’t locate NOAA water temperatures readings after they adjust the raw data.
30 day animation of the Arctic:
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/CT/animate.arctic.color.0.html
Isn’t R. Gates fascinating?
What is the difference between laterally and horizontally?
I really don’t care where everyone thinks that the heat has gone. I’m singularly concerned that none of this ‘missing’ heat is nowhere near my garden. Almost all of my seedlings which were in the greenhouse (!) died when the frost came back during the night of 3/4 May.
The part of England (a country which is mired in a political nightmare) where I live is famous for its benign climatic conditions which are tempered by the proximity of the supposedly warming sea. Well, the sea has changed; agriculture in the area is suffering and the local fishermen say that their usual catches have declined dramatically.
I know, it’s just weather, not ‘Climate’. All I want is some warmth in whatever shines on my garden!
The warmest water is still on top of the ocean.
This is just a decrease from the normal temperature profile (and the El Nino temperature profile) of the equatorial Pacific which has a certain pattern/climatology throughout the year.
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ocean/anim/wkxzteq_all.gif
The driver of this system (and there are many parts) is the Trade Winds (the Winds literally push/drag warm surface currents across the Pacific), Atmospheric Angular Momentum, the SOI and then how tropical convection storms respond to the changes. All of these factors are part of one big system and they are all inter-related.
R. Gates
Heat lossed to space thru the stratosphere undetected, impossible. Heat from upper oceans taken to the icy depths undetected, certainly. Eh?
El Nino’s are an air conditioner for the oceans, They increase temperature at the ocean surface using a stored pool of warm water. This eventually results a moisture plume that condenses and blocks out the sun. the oceans cool due to lack of replacement energy since they are constantly cooling (ie every night).
Most of the energy in oceans is lost via latent heat transfer, evaporation and convection which bypasses greenhouse gasses in the troposphere.
As to the stratosphere, the temp seems to be driven by volcano regulated water changes. The decrease in temp is associated with loss of water vapor post pinatubo.
SO2 is involved water droplet nucleation and could dry out the stratosphere, causing it to cool. Due to the tropopause that water cant be replace quickly.
The lower stratospheric temp leads the tropospheric temp by about two years.
My theory is that the stratosphere regulates the troposphere by controlling cloud amounts somehow. Stratospheric regulation also gets around the problem of fast ocean response times.
Gerard Harbison says:
May 7, 2010 at 1:41 pm
Roger:
As someone who does thermodynamics for a living, I HATE seeing heat content given in units of degrees Celsius. The correct units are Joules, and somewhere in there you need a heat capacity.
———————————————————————
Climatologists have special physics. Convection reverses, degrees convert directly to watts, water has no phase change or enthalpy and the weather is controlled by soda pop. Low resolution measurements yield precision calculations that prove this and as long as people are debating the narrative, the narrative functions for its intended purpose of keeping people distracted from facing reality- which, after so much investment in stupidity is precisely what they wish for.
The codependents have a deeply satisfying relationship of which their part consists of hoping for change with every new john their daddy sends to the crib. Incantations and talismans guide their decisions. They have a paper fetish. Scraps of paper are believed to influence the weather, scraps of paper are avidly traded and anything on paper is worth 100 to 1000 times reality. Scraps of paper are capable of transforming reality at the whim of the wizardly scribes.
This is the biggest sacking in human history. It takes nobody to claim responsibility for his own actions for this to succeed, and by mutual agreement this has become an orgy of collective and individual evasion of responsibility.
The most anybody can manage is to giggle like an idiot while Hannibal takes another slice of frontal cortex. America has been asking for it – the proof is that you’ve been happily paying for it. The proof of that is you don’t stop; the worse it gets the more you pay to discuss your hope for change.
Now you are the system. Look at what you’ve done by not doing. Look at the results of your decision to avoid deciding. Laugh about it, cry about it, pay more and keep repeating it. It’s not working, is it? You will get the responsiblity in the end. Nature is like that and bigger than you. After demonetizing money your daddeh decerebrated science. You really have nothing left but mysticism. After the inevitable pain-for-all, your job will be to lie about how you did this to yourselves – so your kids can repeat the same act.
Ed Caryl says:
May 7, 2010 at 11:03 am
Tell Sen. Sensenbrenner. I hope he reads this blog.
That’s Rep. Sensenbrenner – I made that Senator mistake yesterday.
R. Gates says:
May 7, 2010 at 11:31 am
“No instruments yet to measure this, but Trenberth et. al. are working on that.”
I hope he isnt trying to find it in a model.
“Smokey says:
May 7, 2010 at 2:32 pm
Isn’t R. Gates fascinating?
[…]
What is the difference between laterally and horizontally?”
Laterally is the OTHER horizontally.
RockyRoad mentioned that West Yellowstone was 8 degrees this morning. Well it was 2 above at the Lake Yellowstone area this morning.
Steve Goddard and Jeff Brown:
I’m with Jeff on the long snow season being the norm in the Front Range. I live 5 miles up a canyon outside of Boulder. For the last 17 years we’ve had snowfall Oct-May, some years also Sept and June.
R Gates
In the context of these large “mixing” currents, heat can get pulled down, not by thermo or salinity gradient, obviously, but by the kinetic motion of the cells themselves. Think of throwing a small plastic ball off of a waterfall. Though the ball might be less dense than the water, and will eventually rise up to the top, the initial kinetic energy of the all the water moving in the same direction can easily pull the ball down under water. >>
That of course is true. Now can you explain what physical process it is that imparts so much momentum in warm water that:
1) it descends to depths of the oceans that we can’t measure
2) it does so in such a narrow column that it passes between all the argo buoys doing ocean temperature measurement all over the world completely undetected
3) it does so without causing any disturbance noticed in surface behaviour
4) the cold water that it supposedly displaces, even temporarily, does not show up anywhere on the surface nor does it pass by the argo buoys on the way up
5) How does this momentum overwhelm the natural downwelling processes of cold water sinking that we can in fact observe, and why is it that we can oberve them but not your warm downward currents?
6) Why does every new piece of data suggesting that the AGW theory is hopelessly wrong based on actual measurements of actual physical processes get responded to with increasingly impossible physical processes that can’t be explained by physics, aren’t supported by observation, and are proposed as existing in only those places for which we have no measurements, moved there by processes that cannot be detected?
Pat Frank says:
May 7, 2010 at 12:16 pm
I remain a little confused about how heat can be, “transferred deeper into the ocean.” Warmer waters are typically less dense waters, and will rise toward the surface. So, what’s the mechanism for transferring heat against the buoyancy gradient?
It’s all in the power of salt.
Assume that in the sea, the warm water is lying on top of colder water. As the warm water evaporates, it gets saltier and saltier. The salt makes this warm water denser and denser. At some point, the warm salty water becomes more dense than the colder less salty water, and so sinks below it.
This drives warm water downwards.
Of course, in order to do this, you’ve dumped X amount of heat into the atmosphere, whence it rises to radiate into space – so “losing” warm water does mean radiation into space no matter which way you slice it.
Unless of course, you believe that cold objects heat warm ones, in which case the “back radiation” will shine back down onto the sea and boil it…