Guest Post by Bob Tisdale,
The update to the OHC data also included major changes, which have reduced the long-term rise in OHC. Refer to the gif animation, Figure 1, that shows the global OHC data from their June 2010 update (through March 2010) and from the most recent update and change (though June 2010). The revisions are considerable in many ocean basins. As described in their explanation of ocean heat content (OHC) data changes, the changes result from “data additions and data quality control,” from a switch in base climatology, and from revised Expendable Bathythermograph (XBT) bias calculations. (Refer to the NOAA FAQ webpage What is an XBT?) Immediately following Figure 1 is a link to a graph that shows the difference between the two global datasets, with the June 2010 update subtracted from the September 2010 update.
http://i56.tinypic.com/2vhsta8.jpg
Figure 1 – Global
Link to Graph of the Difference:
http://i51.tinypic.com/2qi07s0.jpg
#########################
Table 1 shows the OHC linear trends (in Gigajoules/Square Meter per Decade) for the global and hemispheric data and for the individual ocean basin subsets. Also shown are the differences (the data from the September 2010 update MINUS the data from the June 2010 update) and the percent change (difference divided by June 2010 update). Note: the June 2010 update included data through March 2010 and the September update/change included data through June 2010, but Table 1 only compares linear trends for the datasets through March 2010. As shown in Table 1, the linear trend for the Northern Hemisphere OHC data only dropped approximately 2%, while the Southern Hemisphere linear trend dropped about 16%. There was a minor increase in North Pacific trend (4%), while there were considerable drops in the linear trends of the South Atlantic (23%), South Pacific (17%) and the Southern Ocean (32%).
http://i52.tinypic.com/1zx5boi.jpg
Table 1
Figure 2 is the gif animation that shows the Southern Ocean OHC data (South of 60S) before and after the September 2010 changes. Prior to the mid-2000s and the introduction of ARGO buoys, the original data (through March 2010) simply appeared to be the climatology with some data added occasionally when it was available. The updated data seems to emphasize that appearance.
http://i54.tinypic.com/111sabn.jpg
Figure 2 – Southern Ocean
Link to Graph of the Difference:
http://i56.tinypic.com/fuqalc.jpg
#########################
And there is good reason for that appearance. Like Sea Surface Temperature datasets based on buoys and ship sensors, there is very little Southern Hemisphere data, at all depths, prior to the ARGO buoys era. Figures 3 through 6 show the 3-month data distribution maps for January through March of 1955, 1975, 1995 and 2005, at depths of zero meters (surface), 250 meters, 500 meters and 700 meters. South of 60S there was little data even in 2005. The maps are available through the NODC Temperature data distribution figures webpage.
http://i52.tinypic.com/2a8orcp.jpg
Figure 3
##############
http://i55.tinypic.com/aes9lg.jpg
Figure 4
##############
http://i54.tinypic.com/x6gaig.jpg
Figure 5
##############
http://i52.tinypic.com/k9ax3.jpg
Figure 6
##############
THE IMPACT OF CHANGES ON PAST POSTS ABOUT NATURAL OHC VARIATIONS
The recent changes to the OHC data have not had noticeable effects on the timing of the major variations in data that should be attributable to natural variations. For example: The tropical Pacific OHC data still drops during major El Niño events and partially rebounds during most of the La Niña events that follow, Figure 7. The major upward shifts occur during significant La Niña events, which is the recharge/overcharge mode for the tropical Pacific OHC. This, and the similar impact on other ocean basins, was discussed in the post ENSO Dominates NODC Ocean Heat Content (0-700 Meters) Data.
http://i52.tinypic.com/wbqt61.jpg
Figure 7
With the changes to the data, the OHC of the North Pacific north of 20N still drops from the late 1950s to the late 1980s, Figure 8, and then suddenly rises. This increase coincides with a shift in North Pacific sea level pressure. This was discussed in the post North Pacific Ocean Heat Content Shift In The Late 1980s.
http://i55.tinypic.com/v8o60i.jpg
Figure 8
The update/changes caused the OHC for most of the other basins to drop more than the North Atlantic OHC. Refer again to Table 1. This makes the contribution of the North Atlantic OHC to global OHC even greater. And much of the disproportionate rise in North Atlantic OHC is caused by Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), sea level pressure, and ENSO, as discussed in North Atlantic Ocean Heat Content (0-700 Meters) Is Governed By Natural Variables. One cell of the gif animation in Figure 9 compares global and North Atlantic OHC. The increase in North Atlantic OHC dwarfs the global rise. The second cell in Figure 9 compares the North Atlantic OHC to the global data with the North Atlantic removed. It assumes the surface area of the North Atlantic is 15% of the global ocean surface area. Note the decrease in the global trends. With the North Atlantic, the global linear trend is 0.72 GJ/square meter per decade and without the North Atlantic, the “global” data linear trend drops to 0.043 GJ/square meter per decade. Also note how sharply the North Atlantic OHC has dropped since 2005. The North Atlantic is a major contributor to the flattening of global data in recent years.
http://i56.tinypic.com/2m2hq1v.jpg
Figure 9
GIF ANIMATIONS — BEFORE AND AFTER CHANGES
Figures 10 through 18 are gif animations that compare the NODC OHC data for the hemispheres and ocean basin subsets before and after the recent changes. I’ve also provided links to graphs of the differences, with the June 2010 data subtracted from the September 2010 data. They are provided without commentary.
http://i53.tinypic.com/aken3m.jpg
Figure 10 – Tropical Pacific
Link to Graph of the Difference:
http://i51.tinypic.com/34fo420.jpg
#########################
http://i51.tinypic.com/2zrks8x.jpg
Figure 11 – Northern Hemisphere
Link to Graph of the Difference:
http://i56.tinypic.com/22xonc.jpg
#########################
http://i52.tinypic.com/2cy5vf5.jpg
Figure 12 – Southern Hemisphere
Link to Graph of the Difference:
http://i53.tinypic.com/2vaim1u.jpg
#########################
http://i52.tinypic.com/r91v7d.jpg
Figure 13 – North Atlantic
Link to Graph of the Difference:
http://i55.tinypic.com/dm9tas.jpg
#########################
http://i55.tinypic.com/2lcwcir.jpg
Figure 14 – South Atlantic
Link to Graph of the Difference:
http://i51.tinypic.com/2akfvaf.jpg
#########################
http://i56.tinypic.com/2n1t0fm.jpg
Figure 15 – Indian Ocean
Link to Graph of the Difference:
http://i56.tinypic.com/2gxfwvq.jpg
#########################
http://i52.tinypic.com/2dtdiyd.jpg
Figure 16 – North Pacific
Link to Graph of the Difference:
http://i56.tinypic.com/nx553a.jpg
#########################
http://i52.tinypic.com/2u4313m.jpg
Figure 17 – South Pacific
Link to Graph of the Difference:
http://i51.tinypic.com/5yz3sw.jpg
#########################
http://i51.tinypic.com/n5lmp1.jpg
Figure 18 – Arctic Ocean
Link to Graph of the Difference:
http://i55.tinypic.com/2d7h387.jpg
#########################
SOURCE
The NODC OHC data is available through the KNMI Climate Explorer:
http://climexp.knmi.nl/selectfield_obs.cgi?someone@somewhere
(Thanks to Dr Geert Jan van Oldenborgh of KNMI for creating and maintaining Climate Explorer.)
As to ITCZ shifts:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/h3p1736qm55vm080/
As to jet stream shifts:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/h3p1736qm55vm080/
but in fact by the time of publication in 2006 the jets were already going back equatorward and only now is the mainstream realising what I first noticed around 2000.
http://scienceblog.com/1203/changes-in-jet-stream-storm-tracks-linked-to-prairie-drought-patterns/
then this one covers the period up to 2001 when I contend it went into reverse:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24228037/
So all the bits of data are out there. One just needs to join the dots.
To save you some time here is the most relevant extract:
“From 1979 to 2001, the Northern Hemisphere’s jet stream moved northward on average at a rate of about 1.25 miles a year, according to the paper published Friday in the journal Geophysical Research Letters. The authors suspect global warming is the cause, but have yet to prove it.
The jet stream is a high-speed, constantly shifting river of air about 30,000 feet above the ground that guides storm systems and cool air around the globe. And when it moves away from a region, high pressure and clear skies predominate.
Two other jet streams in the Southern Hemisphere are also shifting poleward, the study found.”
George E. Smith says: “Bob, it looks like I got a couple of threads crossed. You had described the ocean heat content as consisting of stored solar plus downwelling LWIR sourced…”
I did? I don’t believe I’ve ever described OHC as having a component of longwave infrared.
Stephen Wilde: Thanks for the quote, which was, “From 1979 to 2001, the Northern Hemisphere’s jet stream moved northward on average at a rate of about 1.25 miles a year, according to the paper published Friday in the journal Geophysical Research Letters. The authors suspect global warming is the cause, but have yet to prove it.”
Over the 22 years of the study, the jets have shifted 27.5 miles, something I find hard to believe was a measured variation, probably some statistical data manipulation. Anyway that would be about 0.5 degrees latitude. Do you think that would make a norticeable difference in Downward Shortwave Radiation, Stephen, assuming they’re correct? The other question, are those measured distances over the oceans, or over land, or both? Did the jets move more over land than the ocean? Things to consider if we’re discussing DSR for the oceans.
Regards
0.5 degrees latitude over 22 years is not a great deal but as I’ve said many times it is a slow and irregular process process and it really comes into its own over that 500 / 1000 year cycling from MWP to LIA to date. The cycle could even be up to 800 / 1600 years as per that delay between temperature rises and subsequent CO2 responses. That would fit the 1500 year climate periodicity noted by some. It’s early days in our consideration of such matters.
Being an irregular process over a period 20 or 30 times longer than the period of observation I doubt that that 22 year period is truly representative so there is plenty of scope for a total shift of 1000 miles or much faster short term shifts especially if the oceanic and solar contributions were to be supplementing one another for a while such as during a period of La Nina plus an active sun or El Nino plus inactive sun.
That would come to about 10 to 20 degrees latitude in all or around 1000 miles and the significance is that it changes net warming to net cooling which accumulates the climate effect over time.
As to being noticeable the fact is that people quickly start noticing and regional agriculture is soon affected if the jets overhead shift just a couple of hundred miles. In UK we can all see a difference between the climate of London and the climate only 200 miles north. The distance between London and the north of Scotland is around 1000 miles and that is a big climate difference in terms of human perceptions..
Although we have seen some shifts during our lifetimes we have been lucky to not yet have seen how large and fast the shifts can be.
As to the other questions they are all sensible but one really needs to ask the authors. However I would expect the shifts to be greater on the eastern side of ocean areas for example the jets approaching western Europe can shift anywhere between Gibraltar and Icealnd. The reason being that I see the bottom up oceanic effects as being more powerful and the Earth’s rotation as it is the effect accumulates as the prevailing winds cross the oceans. Its quite a large effect on the west of the Americas too is it not ?