How ocean currents affect global climate is a question oceanographer may be close to answering

English: Summary: Antarctic circumpolar curren...
Antarctic circumpolar current image from Grace Mission. Courtesy NASA/JPL-Caltech. Source: http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/lookingatearth/grace-images-20051220.html This image fulfill all the conditions of the JPL image use policy. For more information about this: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/images/policy/index.cfm (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

From Florida State University:

Kevin Speer has a “new paradigm” for describing how the world’s oceans circulate — and with it he may help reshape science’s understanding of the processes by which wind, water, sunlight and other factors interact and influence the planet’s climate.

 

A Florida State University professor of oceanography with a passion for teaching, Speer and a colleague recently published a significant paper in the respected journal Nature Geoscience.

Working with John Marshall, an oceanography professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Speer reviewed — or essentially synthesized — vast amounts of previous data on ocean circulation (including their own earlier papers). As a result, they have created what Speer calls a new paradigm in the study of ocean currents on a global scale.

Here’s how it works: Basically, the oceans, together with the atmosphere, rebalance heat on the planet. The sun shines on the Earth and heats up the tropics more than the poles. Near the poles, the ocean is cold and the water sinks; near the equator, the surface of the ocean is inviting and warm — and floats on top of the colder deep water.

So the question is this: Where does the water that goes down come back up?

Speer, Marshall and other oceanographers now believe that it comes back up in the Southern Ocean surrounding Antarctica — not as much in the warm oceans as had been previously thought.

“We’re not saying that nothing comes up in the rest of the World Ocean, just that the main thrust is in the Southern Ocean,” Speer said. “To a large extent it’s driven by the wind.”

Very strong winds, to be precise.

In the rough waters around Antarctica, sailors call those winds the “Roaring Forties” and the “Furious Fifties.” They originate near the Equator, where hot air rises and then is pushed toward the North and South poles by cooler air that rushes in to take its place.

The resulting “eddy-driven upwelling” in the Southern Ocean, as Speer characterizes it, may in fact describe the most important process to date that helps scientists understand the role of the ocean and climate.

Speer, who holds a doctorate in physical oceanography from the prestigious Massachusetts Institute of Technology/Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Joint Program, spent years living in France as an oceanographic researcher for a French governmental agency. (Yes, he’s fluent in French.)

Today, from his office in the basement of the Keen Building on the Florida State campus, Speer serves as interim director of the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Institute, a warren of intriguing, 1960s-era laboratories just a few steps outside his door. It is there that Speer helps students and postdoctoral researchers learn about how climate works.

The laboratory’s equipment includes a large, vintage rotating table designed nearly a half-century ago by the lab’s founder, Florida State meteorology Professor Richard Pfeffer. (The device may be old, but it’s one of the biggest and best in the United States, Speer says). Here students can recreate the ocean’s churning and study natural phenomena such as the Antarctic circumpolar current.

Speer and his students have been studying ocean currents thanks to $2.5 million in funding from a larger $10 million National Science Foundation grant that FSU shares with eight other universities and institutions worldwide. Research has included releasing tracers and floats into the ocean to study the mixing and spreading of currents.

One of Speer’s graduate students, Druv Balwada, recently took part in a joint U.S.-United Kingdom research program to study ocean currents aboard a ship in the Southern Ocean. To view the cruise blog of the nearly three-month voyage, visit http://dimesuk3.blogspot.com/.

“Our students learn and help in various ways,” Speer said. “They certainly help generate some interesting and lively oceanographic research.

Speer and Marshall’s Nature Geoscience paper is titled “Closure of the Meridional Overturning Circulation Through Southern Ocean Upwelling.” To read an abstract or purchase the paper, click here.

– Elizabeth Bettendorf

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

58 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Dr. Lurtz
August 27, 2012 5:45 pm

Fantastic, finally, something that everyone can understand and duplicate [given enough money]: a rotating table. It doesn’t involve a satellite, an unverifiable software program, or a bunch of miss placed temperature measuring sites. Just a good old fashion mechanical device that uses thought and brain power. And, it doesn’t appear to have an agenda other than furthering our understanding of the workings of our planet.

August 27, 2012 6:21 pm

I for some time have been conjecturing that the main drivers of climate are CO2 and oceanic oscillations, in particular the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO).
http://www.climatedata.info/Discussions/Discussions/opinions.php
What is not clear is whether the AMO is the ‘heart’ of the system, and drives climate, or the ‘pulse’, and is an index of the underlying driver.

crosspatch
August 27, 2012 6:30 pm

Interesting. I wonder what impact record amounts of Antarctic sea ice would play in this process as the winds blow more over ice and less across ocean. Would increasing Antarctic ice cover reduce this overturning of water and have a significant impact on this exchange of heat?

August 27, 2012 6:54 pm

I would have thought the Coriolis Effect was symetrical between the poles. Although continental configuration will shape its effect on ocean circulation.
I believe the Southern Ocean upwelling is driven by the katabatic winds off Antarctica (and the low pressure systems they help generate), which are absent in the Arctic.

Alexander K
August 27, 2012 6:57 pm

Great, sounds like real science!

Robert of Ottawa
August 27, 2012 7:03 pm

May I suggest he use a rotating planet for his studies, rather than a one-dimensional model?

August 27, 2012 7:10 pm

Full paper here:
ftp://profs.princeton.edu/leo/journals/MarshallSpeer-RevMOCSouthOceanUpw-NatGeoSci2012.pdf
“Proxy data show that for a period of at least the past
800,000 years, Antarctic temperatures have covaried with
atmospheric CO2, although the relationship may not be causal.”

L. T. King
August 27, 2012 7:48 pm
Retired Engineer John
August 27, 2012 8:25 pm

Just thinking, Speer says that to a large extent it’s driven by the wind. So both the ocean and atmosphere heat exchanges are driven by the wind. If the energy driving the wind is reduced, the cycling of heat from the tropics to the polar regions is reduced and the polar regions get colder since less heat moves from the equator. Yesterday, WUWT had a quote from Tim Ball saying that ENSO may be related to variations in the energy emitted by the sun, in this instance the Solar Wind. Ball stated that these links were discussed before and ignored by the IPCC. Add the data from the Argo floats from Willis Eschenbach’s post early this year that shows the ocean only heats to 30 degrees and something happens that limits further temperature increases and think about it. Can a mini ice age be caused by a slowing of the winds?

Allatlast
August 27, 2012 8:27 pm

Interesting to notice you looking directly the other way right now… http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/28/science/earth/sea-ice-in-arctic-measured-at-record-low.html?ref=science

george e smith
August 27, 2012 8:36 pm

Well that’s the first map of ocean currents measured in depth, rather than velocity, that I have ever seen.
But it does explain why those ice shelves on the Antarctic peninsula keep breaking up. Funny the ones south of Tasmania and New Zealand, seem to stay pretty safe.
Maybe they could dredge the Cape channel deeper, so the PacificAtlantic Ocean can get through there easier, and not bust up the ice

August 27, 2012 8:58 pm

So the question is this: Where does the water that goes down come back up?
Uhmm, it doesn’t matter because water moves to an equilibrium pretty quick? Quicker if it’s stirred. Don’t get me wrong, I love the thought but, if that’s the question, that’s the answer.

davidmhoffer
August 27, 2012 9:33 pm

This is one of those papers that takes me 8 or 9 reads before I can quantify with any accuracy how far over my head it is. That said, this statement stood out for me:
“Deep-water formation in the Northern Hemisphere has long received much attention as the axis of climate change. The upwelling branch in the Southern Ocean is now being recognized as a vital component of our climate system and an equally important agent of global change.”
It strikes me that the authors are taking a round about way of saying that the climate models have completely missed one of the largest drivers of climate variability on earth. The paper struck me from the get go as being a rather pragmatic evaluation of data rather than an attempt to assert a foregone conclusion. They didn’t overtly call the climate models currently in vogue fataly flawed, but if their results are in fact accurate, then what other conclusion can one draw about climate models that do not take this major circulation pattern into account?

August 27, 2012 10:06 pm

“Observations indicate that the outgassing of natural
CO2 from the interior ocean has increased in the past twenty
years, offsetting the anthropogenic source.”
Say what?
Pretty much summarizes the confusion that arises when an otherwise great paper genuflects to the party line.
Luv the notion of adiabatic forcing in the water. Too few appreciate the extent to which the ocean is an mirror of the atmosphere, albeit more geographically constrained.
In this case the inclined trajectory of the bottom water contrary th the thermocline is not caused by gravity, but by siphon. The Antarctic gyre is a centrifugal pump.
Not enough emphasis on the Arctic Ocean where there is NO LAND. Freezing makes that water very salty and very cold

Bert Hannah
August 27, 2012 10:22 pm

Flotsametrics by Curtis Ebbesmeyer provides a greater indepth look at the cycle of the gyres and their eddies. Well worth the read.

August 27, 2012 11:48 pm

Good to see some attention being properly directed despite all the distractions.
Internal ocean variability plus external solar variability combining to push the climate zones and jets into different positions over time is my favoured diagnosis for all observed climate change.
There could be a contribution from our CO2 but too small to measure compared to natural variations.

stephen richards
August 28, 2012 12:30 am

It does open a window into why the Sth Pole ice is getting bigger and the Nth Pole ice is shrinking. Joe Bastardi spoke about the imbalance between nth and sth some time ago.

August 28, 2012 1:01 am

“Observations indicate that the outgassing of natural
CO2 from the interior ocean has increased in the past twenty
years, offsetting the anthropogenic source.”
Don’t be too hasty to dismiss this. There’s a good case for outgassing governed by rising ocean temperature (and vice versa) and for ocean temperature governed by solar activity after a 99-year timelag: http://endisnighnot.blogspot.com/2012/03/lets-get-sorted.html
Last March, in my final sentence of the above piece, I wrote: “What papers are out there giving a mathematical treatment of the oceans’ CO2 budget over century timescales?” I will read the Speer paper with interest in the hope that it clarifies the issue of oceanic transient response.

Otter
August 28, 2012 1:24 am

Philip Bradley – I am most likely wrong, but, I would suspect the coriolis effect is lopsided, because the planet itself is lopsided. It is somewhat egg-shaped.

Mark
August 28, 2012 1:35 am

Philip Bradley says:
I would have thought the Coriolis Effect was symetrical between the poles. Although continental configuration will shape its effect on ocean circulation.
You have almost the opposite configuration at each pole. The North pole being roughly in the middle of an ocean whereas the South pole is roughly in the middle of a continent.

August 28, 2012 1:41 am

For some time now I advocated role of the ocean currents in the natural climate change. Heat capacity of oceans combined with available energy transport from equatorial areas pole-ward is the key to the climate variability.
Climate change is dominated by natural oscillations of sun and the Earth’s core. One provides the energy, the other the variability in the oceanic absorption and release of the energy. Understanding of the natural oscillations is the key the climate change, having made some progress in that direction, now it is possible to correlate multidecadal changes in temperatures to new factors not considered previously.

August 28, 2012 2:30 am

Interesting.
(Not my work I might add)

Ian W
August 28, 2012 3:22 am

Hockey Schtick says:
August 27, 2012 at 7:10 pm
Full paper here:
ftp://profs.princeton.edu/leo/journals/MarshallSpeer-RevMOCSouthOceanUpw-NatGeoSci2012.pdf
“Proxy data show that for a period of at least the past
800,000 years, Antarctic temperatures have covaried with
atmospheric CO2, although the relationship may not be causal.”

I think that there is a causal relationship has the good doctor not heard of Henry’s Law?
At a constant temperature, the amount of a given gas that dissolves in a given type and volume of liquid is directly proportional to the partial pressure of that gas in equilibrium with that liquid.
As the ocean temperature increases the solubility of CO2 decreases. And it is not a new research result. It has been shown empirically for some time that as global temperatures rose over the following period of up to 8 centuries CO2 concentrations rose.
Indeed, the monotonic rise in CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere shown by Mauna Loa and other observation sites would appear to indicate that ocean outgassing is a more likely source of the rise in CO2. The assumption made by climate ‘scientists’ that natural sources of CO2 are a constant is totally flawed.

August 28, 2012 3:46 am

Ever since I heard about how the “top” IPCC models failed to include the Agulhas Leakage (pre-cursur for the North Atlantic drift) I became super skeptical. The fact somebody is working on this “bigger picture” study reallycheers me up 😀
Thanks for posting.

1 2 3