"Profound" climate variability engine found – leakage around the Cape of Good Hope "could mean that current IPCC model predictions for the next century are wrong"

File:Cape of good hope.JPG
The sign at the Cape of Good Hope - Image from Wikipedia

From the National Science Foundation: Threading the Climate Needle: The Agulhas Current System

Increased Agulhas “leakage” significant player in global climate variability

Agulhas Current system and its "leakage" into the Atlantic Ocean, affecting climate. - Click to enlarge

Additional photos here

The Agulhas Current which runs along the east coast of Africa may not be as well known as its counterpart in the Atlantic, the Gulf Stream. But now researchers are taking a closer look at this current and its “leakage” from the Indian Ocean into the Atlantic Ocean–and what that may mean for climate change

In results of a study published in this week’s issue of the journal Nature, a team of scientists led by University of Miami Rosenstiel School of Marine & Atmospheric Science Oceanographer Lisa Beal, suggests that Agulhas leakage could be a significant player in global climate variability.

The Agulhas Current transports warm and salty waters from the tropical Indian Ocean to the southern tip of Africa. There most of the water loops around to remain in the Indian Ocean (the Agulhas Retroflection), while some water leaks into the fresher Atlantic Ocean via giant Agulhas rings.

Once in the Atlantic, the salty Agulhas leakage waters eventually flow into the Northern Hemisphere and act to strengthen the Atlantic overturning circulation by enhancing deep-water formation.

Atlantic overturning circulation is technically known as Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (AMOC); it carries warm shallow water into northern latitudes and returns cold deep water southward across the equator.

Recent research points to an increase in Agulhas leakage over the last few decades, caused primarily by human-induced climate change.

The finding is profound, oceanographers say, because it suggests that increased Agulhas leakage could trigger a strengthening in Atlantic overturning circulation–at a time when warming and accelerated meltwater input in the North Atlantic has been predicted to weaken it.

“This could mean that current IPCC model predictions for the next century are wrong, and there will be no cooling in the North Atlantic to partially offset the effects of global climate change over North America and Europe,” said Beal.

“Instead, increasing Agulhas leakage could stabilize the oceanic heat transport carried by the Atlantic overturning circulation.”

There are also paleoceanographic data to suggest that dramatic peaks in Agulhas leakage over the past 500,000 years may have triggered the end of glacial cycles.

These data are further evidence that the Agulhas system and its leakage play an important role in the planet’s climate, Beal and others say.

“This study shows that local changes in atmospheric and oceanic conditions in the Southern Hemisphere can affect the strength of the ocean circulation in unexpected ways,” said Eric Itsweire, director of the National Science Foundation (NSF)’s physical oceanography program, which funded the research.

“Under a warming climate,” said Itsweire, “the Agulhas Current system near the tip of South Africa could bring more warm salty water from the Indian to the Atlantic Ocean and counteract opposing effects from the Arctic Ocean.”

The study establishes the need for additional research in the region that focuses on Agulhas rings, as well as on the leakage, believes Beal.

Climate modeling experiments are critical, she said, and need to be supported by paleoceanographic data and sustained observations to firmly establish the role of the Agulhas system in a warming climate.

“Our goal now is to get more of the scientific community involved in research on the Agulhas system and its global effects,” said Beal. “The emphasis has been too long in the North Atlantic.”

The Agulhas Current Time-Series Experiment, or ACT, was launched in April 2010 to measure the variability of the Agulhas Current using a combination of current meter moorings and satellite data.

Beal, who serves as chief scientist, spent one month aboard the research vessel Knorr in the southwest Indian Ocean deploying oceanographic instruments.

The data gathered in situ, when combined with along-track satellite information, will help increase our understanding of how the Agulhas system is changing in a warming climate, Beal said.

The scientific team included Beal, Wilhelmus P.M. de Ruijter of Utrecht University in the Netherlands, Arne Biastoch of Leibniz- Institut für Meereswissenschaften (IFM-GEOMAR) in Germany, and Rainer Zahn of the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona in Spain.

It also included members of the Scientific Committee for Oceanic Research (SCOR) Working Group 136 on the Climatic Importance of the Agulhas System, sponsored by SCOR, the International Association for the Physical Sciences of the Oceans, and the World Climate Research Program.

For information on the program, please visit the ACT website.

-NSF-

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

145 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Editor
April 27, 2011 8:09 pm

TomRude says: “Bob Tisdale the poles thermal deficit directs atmospheric circulation. It is the strength of this circulation that also create or not upwellings. Read Leroux.”
TomRude & Stephen Wilde: I may have to correct myself. I went looking for the paper I was referring to in my earlier comment and couldn’t find it. I did come up with one that seems to agree with what both of you are saying, though. Refer to Kelly and Dong (2004):
http://kkelly.apl.washington.edu/preprints/KellyDong_monog2004.pdf
I’ll look again tomorrow.

Mike Bromley the Kurd
April 27, 2011 8:12 pm

This is profound, all right. Profound in its depth of cynicism. Profound in its outright and shameless agenda-serving. Here is a current that is poorly understood, by their own admission, but they can assert that climate change is affecting it? What total and utter B*!!s*ytte! (snip if you wish). It’s painful to read stuff like this, in all of its smug and shallow glory.

Editor
April 27, 2011 8:28 pm

sky says: April 27, 2011 at 7:42 pm
Inasmuch as the Agulhas Current is a classic WIND-driven western boundary current
No, Boundary Currents;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Boundary_Current
are subsets of Ocean Gyres;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_gyre
which are caused by Earth’s Rotation, not wind.
the relevance to the paper at hand is unclear.
There is a significant upwelling at the location of the “leakage”;
http://www-odp.tamu.edu/publications/175_IR/chap_12/c12_f1.htm
and “in the southeast Atlantic Ocean the current retroflects (turns back on itself) in the Agulhas Retroflection due to shear interactions with the strong Antarctic Circumpolar Current.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agulhas_Current
And the whole idea that the miserably sluggish and highly diffuse GHC is the main global conveyor of oceanic heat–across the equator, no less–is a Gorean myth perpetrated upon a public profoundly unacquainted with oceanographic observations.
What’s the GHC? Are you talking about the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation?
http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2008/11/23/atlantic-meridional-overturning-circulation-data/

Ed Barbar
April 27, 2011 8:37 pm

Do we only get the studies that show how much global warming is than ever anyone previously thought? Or do we only see the ones that do posted here? In a random sample of effects, one would think the studies would not all go one way.

Paul Vaughan
April 27, 2011 8:54 pm

The ocean doesn’t generate its own heat. Enough of these ridiculous notions that the ocean drives everything.
Water may have a higher heat capacity than air, but just as air cools diurnally, oceans cool annually. Decades not required.
Not irradiance, but insolation. Not just clouds, but circulation. Not just time, but space. Not just process, but pattern.
I’ve spent my whole life around water. It responds to circulation & insolation and it only takes 3 months to cool off enough to kill. Relying too heavily on anomalies blinds people. Myths about mysterious ocean currents are part of the problem.
A few good exchanges going on here. Pleased to observe.
Best Regards.

Paul Vaughan
April 27, 2011 9:01 pm

“Dear lady can you hear the wind blow
and did you know?
Your stairway lies on the whisperin’ wind…”
— Led Zeppelin

Alex
April 27, 2011 9:10 pm

“some twisted logic.
1. criticize models for not capturing everything
2. scientist finds something not well represented in the models
3. scientist suggests more study ( to fix #1)
4. people complain that scientist does number 3.
damned if they do, damned if they don’t
that’s not exactly fair to them folks
———————————————
Twisting is claiming to know enough to pass legislation and then discovering things that are such powerful.
No one knows the cloud cover 100 yrs ago but we are full of certainty to plot decimal degree differences. hahah. Farsical.

David Falkner
April 27, 2011 9:32 pm

Hmm. Continental positioning could be more important than thought? Doesn’t this one thing, if true, debase their modeling process prior to the next century also? If they have modeled the past correctly without including such a ‘profound’ climate engine, that speaks to the veracity of the model, no?

David Falkner
April 27, 2011 9:40 pm

Also, could this ‘leakage’ help explain how the Little Ice Age ended?

David Falkner
April 27, 2011 9:46 pm

And what does this current contribute to current warming anyway? They say they have paleo-data, but that is not likely to be granular enough to give a clear picture of what the current contribution to the GTA is. If the attribution studies have not accounted for a ‘profound’ and ‘abrupt’ climate engine, then the attribution studies are also grossly incorrect. A larger portion of the current anomaly would be explained. That would leave less warming to attribute to CO2, further undermining the case.

rbateman
April 27, 2011 9:55 pm

I didn’t need a map to figure out that the IPCC has been leaking.
At the rate they are taking on water, it’s a tossup between the voyage of the Titanic and the Poseidon Adventure, or better yet, the S.S. Concensus.

April 27, 2011 10:14 pm

“and there will be no cooling in the North Atlantic ”
Alas, but there is a strong one. Both OHC and SST peaked around 2006, despite 2010 SST peak.

wayne
April 27, 2011 10:21 pm

steven mosher says:
April 27, 2011 at 3:49 pm
” that’s not exactly fair to them folks ”
Golly Steven, on that one I have to agree with you.

ferd berple
April 27, 2011 10:37 pm

If the science is settled, why do they need more research money?
Doesn’t this say it all? “caused primarily by human-induced climate change”
They already know the answer they are looking for, now they want money to find “facts” to support it. Those facts that are contrary they will “hide” through a “smart trick” of science.

Steeptown
April 27, 2011 10:49 pm

So the science is settled then!

Grumpy Old Man
April 27, 2011 10:55 pm

I’m confused. Does this mean that it’s worse than they think or that it is worse than we think?

Tom Harley
April 27, 2011 11:21 pm

predictions for the next century: here they are trying to do it in Perth, corals and tree species.
Weather changes?…climate change experts?…that’s an oxymoron
http://pindanpost.wordpress.com

Post Young
April 27, 2011 11:31 pm

Actually, this is quite comical: human-induced climate change has made the IPCC wrong.
That would have to be one of the best effects of AGW (were it true).

UK Sceptic
April 27, 2011 11:44 pm

Climate spivs – ain’tcha sick of ’em?

Stephen Wilde
April 27, 2011 11:55 pm

Bob Tisdale says:
April 27, 2011 at 5:19 pm Bob, I also referred to the bottom up oceanic effect. There are two opposing processes involved. Top down solar and bottom up oceanic.

Ralph
April 28, 2011 12:02 am

>>Mosher
>>some twisted logic.
>>1. criticize models for not capturing everything
But don’t forget, Steve, that the ‘Science is Settled’.
The criticism is fair and justified.
.

Pete H
April 28, 2011 12:21 am

“This could mean”, “it suggests”, “could trigger”, “has been predicted”, “could stabilize” etc etc !
and this followed the post on the East Greenland Current having no trend and they wonder why we are sceptical!

Lew Skannen
April 28, 2011 12:22 am

To paraphrase Stalin – the number of dead models is going from a catastrophe to a statistic.

Allan M
April 28, 2011 12:54 am

Climate modeling experiments are critical, she said, and need to be supported by paleoceanographic data and sustained observations to firmly establish the role of the Agulhas system in a warming climate.
Isn’t that the wrong way round?

Alexander K
April 28, 2011 1:08 am

Sorry Steve Mosher, but when earnest scientists start from a pre-judged agenda and include fatuous comments such as ‘models could be wrong’ in the title, they make themselves a fair target for sceptcism, mild sarcasm and gentle mirth. You would have cause for complaint if the sceptics on WUWT used similar tactics to the arch-Warmists, not unknown on other blogs; swarming ad-hom attacks and general nastiness are not seen on WUWT, thanks to the civilised tone that Anthony rightly insists must be maintained.