The WUWT ENSO meter – at zero, or neutral at the moment:
Guest post by Bob Tisdale
NOAA issued an El Niño watch yesterday morning. The watch seems a bit premature. A “watch” in NOAA parlance means “conditions are favorable,” but the synopsis of the NOAA report reads:
There is a 50% chance that El Niño conditions will develop during the second half of 2012.
A 50% chance also means that El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO)-neutral conditions (not an El Niño and not a La Niña) are just as likely. Seems to me, an El Niño watch would have been more appropriate when the odds are weighted a little more toward El Niño. That may happen next month…and it may not.
Within hours of NOAA issuing the watch, Joe Romm of Climate Progress published the blog post NOAA Says ’50% Chance’ El Niño Will Develop In Second Half Of 2012, Which NASA Says Would Lead To ‘Rapid Warming’. The majority of Romm’s post is a parroting of the contents of the January 12, 2012 GISS webpage Global Temperature in 2011, Trends, and Prospects.
Let’s look at the source of the “rapid warming” in Joe Romm’s title.
Joe writes:
NASA explains that the apparent recent slowdown in global surface temperature rise is likely to prove “illusory”:
And he quotes from GISS (his boldface):
The cool La Niña phase of the cyclically variable Southern Oscillation of tropical temperatures has been dominant in the past three years, and the deepest solar minimum in the period of satellite data occurred over the past half dozen years. We conclude that the slowdown of warming is likely to prove illusory, with more rapid warming appearing over the next few years.
The paragraph of the GISS document that Joe Romm quoted in part from was the summary of the 2011 GISS report. It reads in full:
2011 was only the ninth warmest year in the GISS analysis of global temperature change, yet nine of the ten warmest years in the instrumental record (since 1880) have occurred in the 21st century. The past year has been cooled by a moderately strong La Niña. The 5-year (60-month) running mean global temperature hints at a slowdown in the global warming rate during the past few years. However, the cool La Niña phase of the cyclically variable Southern Oscillation of tropical temperatures has been dominant in the past three years, and the deepest solar minimum in the period of satellite data occurred over the past half dozen years. We conclude that the slowdown of warming is likely to prove illusory, with more rapid warming appearing over the next few years.
It appears Romm forgot to include an ellipse and a bracket on his upper-case “T” at the beginning of his quote to indicate he was not presenting that sentence in full. The complete sentence starts with the word “However”, which might lead readers to investigate what was written before it. The sentence that comes immediately before the Romm quote reads:
The 5-year (60-month) running mean global temperature hints at a slowdown in the global warming rate during the past few years.
A 5-year running mean of GISS Land-Ocean Temperature Index (LOTI) data does more than hint at a slowdown global in the global warming rate, it shows it quite well. Refer to the GISS Figure 3. The 5-year average (centered on the 3rdyear) in 2009 is the same as it was in 2003 (0.53 deg C). Not too surprisingly, Joe Romm chose to exclude any reference to that in his quote. What did surprise me was the sentence that Romm did include (my boldface):
However, the cool La Niña phase of the cyclically variable Southern Oscillation of tropical temperatures has been dominant in the past three years, and the deepest solar minimum in the period of satellite data occurred over the past half dozen years.
GISS has stated that global surface temperatures have flattened, in part, because La Niña conditions dominated the last three years. Based on GISS Land-Ocean Temperature data, the 2009-2011 average NINO3.4 sea surface temperature anomalies (the ENSO index referred to by GISS in their report) was -0.19 deg C, and that confirms that La Niña has dominated the past 3 years. But the GISS statement also implies the opposite occurs when El Niño events dominate ENSO.
It just so happens, I’ve been illustrating that fact for the past year and a half. It began with my post Multidecadal Changes In Sea Surface Temperature. The alternate title reads Do Multidecadal Changes In The Strength And Frequency Of El Niño and La Niña Events Cause Global Sea Surface Temperature Anomalies To Rise And Fall Over Multidecadal Periods? The WattsUpWithThat cross post is here.
I also discuss this in the Introduction of my upcoming ebook The Ignored Driver of Global Climate: El Niño-Southern Oscillation.
During a multidecadal period when El Niño events dominate (a period when El Niño events are stronger, when they occur more often and when they last longer than La Niña events), more heat than normal is released from the tropical Pacific and more warm water than normal is transported by ocean currents toward the poles—with that warm water releasing heat to the atmosphere along the way. As a result, global sea surface and land surface temperatures warm during multidecadal periods when El Niño events dominate. Similarly, global temperatures cool during multidecadal periods when La Niña events are stronger, last longer and occur more often than El Niño events.
I discussed it in much more detail in my book If the IPCC was Selling Manmade Global Warming as a Product, Would the FTC Stop their deceptive Ads? And since I haven’t reached that far in the draft of The Ignored Driver of Global Climate: El Niño-Southern Oscillation, I’ll have to quote from my existing book:
There are multidecadal periods, however, during the 20th Century when El Niño events are stronger and more frequent than La Niña events. We can illustrate this using the average NINO3.4 sea surface temperature anomalies for given periods. For our example, we’ll use the early and late 20th Century warming periods, and the mid-century “flat temperature” period. We’ll extend the late warming period to 2010 to bring it more up to date. And we’ll compare annual NINO3.4 data to GISS Global Land-Ocean Temperature Index (LOTI) data. See Figure 6-50. The period-average NINO3.4 sea surface temperature anomalies during the early and late warming periods are quite similar. On the other hand, the period average NINO3.4 sea surface temperature anomalies during the mid-20th Century flat temperature period are slightly negative.
Figure 6-50
In Figure 6-51, the temperature scale of the graph has been reduced so that it better shows the global surface temperature and the period-average NINO3.4 sea surface temperatures.
For the early warming period of 1917 to 1944, the average NINO3.4 sea surface temperature anomalies are about +0.175 deg C, and during the late warming period of 1977 to 2010, they’re approximately +0.188 deg C. The fact that the average NINO3.4 sea surface temperature anomalies are greater than zero indicates that the frequency and magnitude of El Niño events are greater than La Niña events. That would also indicate, during those periods:
1. more warm water is released from the Pacific Warm Pool than “normal”,
2. the tropical Pacific is releasing more heat than normal into the atmosphere,
3. teleconnections are causing surface temperatures outside of the tropical Pacific to warm more than normal, and
4. more warm water than normal is being redistributed toward the poles.
Figure 6-51
Suppose instead of the large periodic events, there were long-term low-temperature El Niño events taking place during those two periods; that is, one long El Niño during each warming period; we would expect surface temperatures to rise. And that is, in effect, what happened.
The reverse should happen during multidecadal periods when NINO3.4 surface temperatures are below normal. The average NINO3.4 sea surface temperature anomalies for the period of 1944 to 1976 is -0.05 deg C. La Niña events obviously dominated the mid-20th Century “flat temperature” period. And since La Niña events dominated:
1. less warm water is released from the Pacific Warm Pool than “normal”,
2. the tropical Pacific is releasing less heat than normal into the atmosphere,
3. teleconnections are causing surface temperatures outside of the tropical Pacific to warm less than normal, and
4. less warm water than normal is being redistributed toward the poles.
So we would expect Global land plus sea surface temperatures to decline during that period. And using GISS Land-Ocean Temperature Index data, that’s exactly what happened during that period. Refer to Figure 6-52.
Figure 6-52
Joe Romm closed his post yesterday with:
Stay tuned. The heat is on.
Apparently, Joe hasn’t realized the heat’s been on since 1976 when El Niño events started to dominate ENSO.
Maybe, just maybe, we’ve recently entered into a new epoch when the frequency, magnitude and duration of La Niña events exceed those of El Niño. In other words, has El Niño turned over control of ENSO to his little sister La Niña? Only time will tell.
INTERESTED IN LEARNING MORE ABOUT THE EL NIÑO-SOUTHERN OSCILLATION AND DON’T WANT TO WAIT FOR MY NEW BOOK?
I hope to have my new ebook competed by the end of July. If that’s not soon enough for you and you’d like an idea of what’s discussed in parts of my upcoming book see If the IPCC was Selling Manmade Global Warming as a Product, Would the FTC Stop their deceptive Ads?
Section 6, or about 25% of the book, is about the processes that are part of El Niño and La Niña events. Many of the discussions are rewordings (expansions and simplifications) of my posts here at Climate Observations, so you could save a few bucks and rummage through dozens of posts. But the book provides a single resource and reference for you and includes a very basic, well-illustrated introduction to El Niño, La Niña, and ENSO-neutral conditions written in simple terms. Included in that section are discussions of how La Niña events are not the opposite of El Niño events and how and why certain parts of the global oceans warm in response to certain El Niño AND to the La Niña events that follow them. The El Niño-Southern Oscillation is a marvelous process Mother Nature has devised to enhance or slow the distribution of heat from the tropics to the poles. It is process that naturally varies in intensity, and due to those variations, it is capable of warming or cooling global temperatures over multiyear and multidecadal periods. The individual chapter titles of Section 6 will give you an idea of the topics discussed. See pages 9 and 10 of the introduction, table of contents, and closing of my book in pdf form here.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
![elninometer-current[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/elninometer-current1.gif?resize=170%2C92)



Rosco says:
June 8, 2012 at 6:21 pm
I still can’t believe the precision quoted in the temperature records. I used to know the record takers for many local government authorities in Queensland during the 80′s and 90′s.
If you could accurately report to the nearest degree you were doing well – where do they get 3 decimal places ??? You need 3 to report 2.
_______________________________________
Yes that is one of the obvious lies from “the Team” the new digital pyrometers and Roy’s satellite data might give you 3 decimals but the stuff recorded before 1970? NO WAY.
Bill Illis says:
June 9, 2012 at 8:21 am
And the Pacific Trade Winds are not providing any acceleration toward El Nino right now. They are a little higher than average right now while they need to slow down considerably and even blow backwards to produce a large El Nino.
http://img571.imageshack.us/img571/3752/ensovstradewindsmay12.png
While the Trades are above average, the actual surface currents in the equatorial Pacific are much slower than normal and are moving backwards across most the equatorial Pacific.
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/GODAS/mnth_gif/xy/mnth.anom.xy.u15m.2012.05.gif
Stronger trades should drive the Bjerknes feedback in the direction of upwelling and La Nina, not el Nino, surely? So it does look like a mixed picture. Maybe neutrality will emerge the winner.
Bill Illis (June 9, 2012 at 8:21 am) wrote:
“Water Vapour versus the ENSO since 1948. […] The importance of this correlation is vastly under-estimated in the global warming debate.
http://img805.imageshack.us/img805/2881/ensotcwv48may12.png “
Agree.
Bill, can you help me identify the data used to produce the top panel of figure 15 (annual oscillation of the inverted barometer (IB) effect in the NCEP system) on p.26 here [ http://ebooks.gfz-potsdam.de/pubman/item/escidoc:8469:2/component/escidoc:8468/9810.pdf ]?
If so, sincerest thanks.
I have determined that the 1940s & 1970s geomagnetic & climate shifts coincide with changes in the spatiotemporal structure of the heliospheric current sheet (HCS).
For hard-core chaos-believers, be aware that this dovetails perfectly with the Tsonis conceptual framework. The implications are nontrivial.
More details at a later date.
“We conclude that the slowdown of warming is likely to prove illusory, with more rapid warming appearing over the next few years.”
I am a fair gentleman. Joe Romm has given us a prediction. If it holds up we should consider listening more to him. Should it, however, fail we may consider him untrustworthy. Three years will do to see what his word is worth.
Re: The WUWT ENSO meter – at zero, or neutral at the moment.
Not any more. I’ve thrown the switch, and the data is now from http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/enso/nino_3.4.txt e.g.:
instead of http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/data/indices/wksst.for currently stuck:
Weekly SST data starts week centered on 3Jan1990 Nino1+2 Nino3 Nino34 Nino4 Week SST SSTA SST SSTA SST SSTA SST SSTA 03JAN1990 23.4-0.4 25.1-0.3 26.6 0.1 28.6 0.5 ... 02MAY2012 26.3 1.6 27.4 0.2 27.7-0.1 28.4-0.1 09MAY2012 25.7 1.2 27.3 0.2 27.8 0.1 28.4-0.2 16MAY2012 25.2 1.0 27.2 0.1 27.8 0.0 28.5-0.2Based on a sample size of one, the BoM data is updated Tuesday at 0015 (EDT, I think, Firefox isn’t telling me), so I’m going to try fetching it Tuesday at 0700 EDT and see how it goes.
Paul Vaughan says:
June 9, 2012 at 11:30 am
————————————-
I think you can find it at the Special Bureau for the Atmosphere.
http://www.aer.com/science-research/earth/earth-mass-and-rotation/special-bureau-atmosphere
The data will be somewhere in this ftp directory:
http://ftp.aer.com/pub/anon_collaborations/sba/
Bill Illis
As I posted earlier , I tend to agree with you that if an El Nino does occur, it will be a weak or minor one . Looking back at the El Nino records , it would appear that during warming periods[ last three decades] there were about 2 climate altering strong El Nino’s per decade . During cooler periods 1880-1910 and again 1940-1970] there was only one per decade . So as we head into the next three decades and if the solar predictions of lower activity are correct , I anticpate the number of strong El Nino’s to start to go down. Weak and moderate El Nino’s happpen regardless of the period.
@Bill Illis (June 9, 2012 at 1:59 pm)
Thank you.
Further elaboration on Paul Vaughan (June 9, 2012 at 11:38 am) (note on Heliospheric Current Sheet (HCS) Earth-Crossings):
http://judithcurry.com/2012/06/08/week-in-review-6812/#comment-207926
includes illustrations & info links – fits 1940 & 1970 framework shift
Still “Waiting for el Ninot”
http://samuel-beckett.net/Waiting_for_Godot_Part1.html
Thanks, Anthony.