Ozone depletion trumps greenhouse gas increase in jet-stream shift

From Penn State

English: Ozone Depletion comparison in North A...
English: Ozone Depletion comparison in North America from 1984-1997. Contrary to popular belief, the Ozone depletion does not affect exclusively the south pole. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. — Depletion of Antarctic ozone is a more important factor than increasing greenhouse gases in shifting the Southern Hemisphere jet stream in a southward direction, according to researchers at Penn State.

“Previous research suggests that this southward shift in the jet stream has contributed to changes in ocean circulation patterns and precipitation patterns in the Southern Hemisphere, both of which can have important impacts on people’s livelihoods,” said Sukyoung Lee, professor of meteorology.

According to Lee, based on modeling studies, both ozone depletion and greenhouse gas increase are thought to have contributed to the southward shift of the Southern Hemisphere jet stream, with the former having a greater impact. B, but until now, no one has been able to determine the extent to which each of these two forcings has contributed to the shift using observational data.

“Understanding the differences between these two forcings is important in predicting what will happen as the ozone hole recovers,” she said. “The jet stream is expected to shift back toward the north as ozone is replenished, yet the greenhouse-gas effect could negate this.” Lee and her colleague, Steven Feldstein, professor of meteorology, developed a new method to distinguish between the effects of the two forcings. The method uses a cluster analysis to investigate the effects of ozone and greenhouse gas on several different observed wind patterns.

“When most people look at ozone and greenhouse gases, they focus on one wind pattern, but my previous research suggests that, by looking at several different but similar patterns, you can learn more about what is really happening,” said Feldstein.

In their study, the researchers analyzed four wind patterns. The first wind pattern corresponded to an equatorwarda shift of the midlatitude westerlies toward the equator. T; the second pattern also described an equatorward shift, but included a strong tropical component. T; the third pattern corresponded to a poleward shift of the westerlies toward the South Pole with a weakening in the maximum strength of the jet; and the. The fourth pattern corresponded to a smaller poleward jet shift with a strong tropical component.

In addition to their novel inclusion of more than one wind pattern in their analysis, the scientists investigated the four wind patterns at very short time scales.

“Climate models are usually run for many years; they don’t look at the day-to-day weather,” said Feldstein. “But we learned that the four wind patterns fluctuate over about 10 days, so they change on a time scale that is similar to daily weather. This realization means that by taking into account fluctuations associated with the daily weather, it will be easier to test theories about the mechanism by which ozone and greenhouse gases influence the jet stream.”

The researchers used an algorithm to examine the relationship between daily weather patterns and the four wind patterns. They found that the first wind pattern — which corresponded to an equatorward shift of the midlatitude westerlies — was associated with greenhouse gases. They also found that the third pattern — which corresponded to a poleward shift of the westerlies — was associated with ozone. The other two wind patterns were unrelated to either of the forcings. The researchers found that a long-term decline in the frequency of the first pattern and a long-term increase in the frequency of the third pattern can explain the changes in the Southern Hemisphere jet stream.

“Ozone had the bigger impact on the change in the position of the jet stream,” said Lee. “The opposite is likely true for the Northern Hemisphere; we think that ozone has a limited influence on the Northern Hemisphere. Understanding which of these forcings is most important in certain locations may help policy makers as they begin to plan for the future.”

In addition to finding that ozone is more important than greenhouse gases in influencing the jet-stream shift, the scientists also found evidence for a mechanism by which greenhouse gases influence the jet-stream shift. They learned that greenhouse gases may not directly influence the jet-stream shift, but rather may indirectly influence the shift by changing tropical convection, or the vertical transfer of heat in large-scale cloud systems, which, in turn, influences the jet shift. The researchers currently are further examining this and other possible mechanisms for how greenhouse gases and ozone influence the jet stream as well as Antarctic sea ice.

The results will appear in the Feb. 1 issue of the journal Science.

“Not only are the results of this paper important for better understanding climate change, but this paper is also important because it uses a new approach to try to better understand climate change; it uses observational data on a short time scale to try to look at cause and effect, which is something that is rarely done in climate research,” said Feldstein. “Also, our results are consistent with climate models, so this paper provides support that climate models are performing well at simulating the atmospheric response to ozone and greenhouse gases.”

###

The National Science Foundation funded this research.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
98 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
SMS
January 31, 2013 5:14 pm

Why should I believe anything any “so called” scientist says?

Ian W
January 31, 2013 5:16 pm

The researchers used an algorithm to examine the relationship between daily weather patterns and the four wind patterns. They found that the first wind pattern in their computer model
I don’t suppose any of these ‘climate computer modelers’ ever stepped outside the computer room to empirically test their hypothesis expressed in algorithms before they rushed out the press release?
No I thought not.

RobW
January 31, 2013 5:16 pm

“our results are consistent with climate models,”
Enough said. How bout them Yankees…

John West
January 31, 2013 5:20 pm

“finding that ozone is more important than greenhouse gases in influencing the jet-stream shift”
Is it the ozone or is it solar UV variation?

Robert M
January 31, 2013 5:20 pm

“according to researchers at Penn State”
Well, at least they put it at the beginning so that I didn’t waste my time. I don’t care what the folks at Penn State concluded from their research, I am very sure that the study is flawed, and the conclusions will support the needs of whoever paid…

corio37
January 31, 2013 5:25 pm

“Important impacts on people’s livelihoods”. I’m guessing that’s not supposed to include getting richer, right?

January 31, 2013 5:26 pm

I think the vertical convection of energy in cloud systems is transporting more CO2 into the upper atmosphere rather than increasing CO2 causing greater vertical convection.

TomRude
January 31, 2013 5:52 pm

“this paper is also important because it uses a new approach to try to better understand climate change; it uses observational data on a short time scale to try to look at cause and effect, which is something that is rarely done in climate research,” said Feldstein”
O my gawd!!! Looking at the synoptic reality! What a novel approach… but it was short lived since “The researchers used an algorithm to examine the relationship between daily weather patterns and the four wind patterns. They found that the first wind pattern — which corresponded to an equatorward shift of the midlatitude westerlies — was associated with greenhouse gases.”
That is truly brilliant: what is the relationship between amount of equatorward shift and amount of greenhouse gas? Does the wind pattern changes when it is CH4 or CO2 since they both have different shelf life in the atmosphere? Cows versus cars… That must be for the next paper… LOL
And the pearl: “The other two wind patterns were unrelated to either of the forcings.”
As if patterns of atmospheric circulation were independent from each others… And that guy is a professor of meteorology? Wow. Penn is more like pain…

John Bell
January 31, 2013 5:55 pm

“According to Lee, based on modeling studies, both ozone depletion and greenhouse gas increase are thought to have contributed to the southward shift of the Southern Hemisphere jet stream, with the former having a greater impact. ”
John Bell here: And ozone loss is thought to come from too much CO2 forcing water up higher in the atmosphere, according to some – therefore it is CO2 pushing jet streams around now. So CO2 can do anything in a model, but how can we go to the atmosphere and test this hypothesis, we can not, and that is why it is not science – just speculation.

January 31, 2013 6:10 pm

Meh…
Time will tell.

H.R.
January 31, 2013 6:17 pm

This is interesting. It’s a side-step from the “Oh my GAWD! We’re all gonna die!” CAGW pablum. This is coming perilously close to sideswiping the scientific method. Stay tuned.

January 31, 2013 6:18 pm

“According to Lee, based on modeling studies, both ozone depletion and greenhouse gas increase are thought to have contributed to the southward shift of the Southern Hemisphere jet stream, with the former having a greater impact. B, but until now, no one has been able to determine the extent to which each of these two forcings has contributed to the shift using observational data.”
So many wrong things in this short paragraph……………..
They made the determination using modeling studies.
Pathetic.

john robertson
January 31, 2013 6:22 pm

So what caused the Southern Hemisphere Jet Stream to shift southward at every other cycle in the past?
Do we have data?
Do we have any indication that there is anything unusual about the current jet stream behaviour?
How long have we been tracking the hemisphere jet streams?
Or do we need proxies of when they hit the Alps and Rockies?
Maybe everyone in penn state U should be in the state pen.

Pamela Gray
January 31, 2013 6:31 pm

So much is wrong with this paper I can’t even begin to critique it. Hindcast anyone????? Estimating the amount of energy it takes to shift the JET STREAM? Anyone??? Bueller? Bueller??

January 31, 2013 6:32 pm

Very interesting! They used an AlGoreithm! AlGoreithms are not used in models. And they used a cluster analysis, on high density measurements no doubt from clusters of drones sampling CO2, and well, of course, ozone depletion. Yep, you can take this one to the CAGW bank!
/sarc off
PlayStation 4?

davidmhoffer
January 31, 2013 6:36 pm

TomRude;
That is truly brilliant: what is the relationship between amount of equatorward shift and amount of greenhouse gas?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And they detected this using observational data based on a ten day fluctuation.
One has to wonder if:
a) they didn’t explain themselves properly
b) they explained themselves properly, they just didn’t stop to think how absurd that is
c) this is an experiment to see how absurd your science can be and still get published

Pamela Gray
January 31, 2013 6:39 pm

Who the hell is letting these people get Ph.D.’s ??????? They’re like someone who doesn’t know the difference between Last minus First and linear regression trend calculations!!!!! Today, I just can’t suffer stupid. Had to do it at work all day. Ain’t doin it here. Not today. This little Irish lass is ready to eat nails! Let me out of the stable! Please!

anarchist hate machine
January 31, 2013 6:56 pm

Why does that image show ozone depletion in the *north* pole? Or am I just making a stupid mistake?

Brent Walker
January 31, 2013 6:56 pm

The Extreme and Far UV emissions provide the energy to create Ozone in the upper stratosphere, mesosphere and lower thermosphere and the various nitrogen oxides in those locations. Over time the more EUV and FUV emissions there are the greater the depth of the Ozone column. The more Ozone there is the more the jet streams move to the poles and the less depth to the Rossby waves (loopiness of the jet stream). What we are seeing at present is a long term reduction of about 40% in the EUV and FUV emissions and a reduction in Ozone resulting even in a hole in the Ozone layer in the last two Northern Hemisphere springs. So the jet streams are migrating towards the equator and the Rossby waves are getting deeper.
If you look at today’s map of the jets streams in both the Northern and Southern hemisphere you will see the jet stream that in the summer normally crosses Australia either just below the continent or at least across Melbourne is currently crossing NSW and Southern Queensland. Also the lower polar jet stream is rising almost from Antarctica to partially link up with the jet stream crossing the continent before diving to below the South Island of New Zealand – in other words a rather extreme loop but one which has caused weather forecasters to suggest there may be some summer snow on the alps in northern Victoria and some rather wild weather in NSW. Also there are parts of the Northern Hemisphere jet stream that appear to have crossed the equator into the Southern Hemisphere in the Pacific. You have to look at both the northern and southern hemisphere jet stream maps to see this.
How the Ozone layer affects the jet streams is not fully understood. But planetary waves and gravity waves are thought to play a part. But it may be as simple as the lower Ozone levels allow more infra-red heat to radiate from Earth into space. This means less is being trapped in the stratosphere and these slightly lower temperatures in the stratosphere then cause a general shift in the jet streams toward the equator where the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere are warmer.
Until recently climate scientists were blaming increasing levels of atmospheric CO2 for causing the gradual migration of jet streams towards the poles in the last three decades of the 20th Century. Given that atmospheric levels of CO2 are still increasing and the jet streams are now moving towards the equator they have had to revise their theories. Also there is no talk of CFC’s affecting the Ozone layer this time. That 1970’s scare was mostly furphy given that the solar cycle at that time was fairly weak.

anarchist hate machine
January 31, 2013 6:57 pm

Oops. Nevermind.

Lawrie Ayres
January 31, 2013 6:58 pm

I’m not a scientist so bear with me. The computer model that led to their determination is consistent with climate models which have been shown to be seriously flawed. Where does that leave their findings? As an aside does Penn State U ban the reading of material outside the prescribed dogma of the warmists? Apparently so because the plethora of research showing the minor role of CO2 in the overall scheme of things leaves one thinking that AGW was a first stab that didn’t really go anywhere but was the catalyst for some very interesting work in more important climate drivers. Pity no one reads the work as policy makers are currently making fools of themselves and making us poor at the same time.

Theo Goodwin
January 31, 2013 7:05 pm

‘“When most people look at ozone and greenhouse gases, they focus on one wind pattern, but my previous research suggests that, by looking at several different but similar patterns, you can learn more about what is really happening,” said Feldstein.
In their study, the researchers analyzed four wind patterns. The first wind pattern corresponded to an equatorwarda shift of the midlatitude westerlies toward the equator. T; the second pattern also described an equatorward shift, but included a strong tropical component. T; the third pattern corresponded to a poleward shift of the westerlies toward the South Pole with a weakening in the maximum strength of the jet; and the. The fourth pattern corresponded to a smaller poleward jet shift with a strong tropical component.
In addition to their novel inclusion of more than one wind pattern in their analysis, the scientists investigated the four wind patterns at very short time scales.’
Novel conclusion in climate science, alright. Looks like an intelligent shift in focus toward empiricism. Eventually, they will have as many patterns as Baskin-Robbins has flavors. Science is hard; always has been and always will be. So-called climate scientists, alarmists, are woefully unaware of this truth and it shows in their work.

MattS
January 31, 2013 7:11 pm

Pamela Gray,
“Who the hell is letting these people get Ph.D.’s ??????? ”
Didn’t you know that you can get Ph.D.s from a Crackerjack box?

Pamela Gray
January 31, 2013 7:11 pm

Between the two potential chicken and egg systems, the jet stream affecting oceans, or oceans affecting jet streams, I look at stored energy available. Me thinks the relatively dense sloppy slurpy stuff called water (and there are how many tons of it?) has far more energy available to affect jet stream position and loops (how dense and energy absorbent is that made-of-air ribbon thingy anyway?) than the jet streams have on oceans. I have no Ph.D. after my name, no meteorology course under my belt, yet I can figure that the oceans have my vote. Once again, who the hell let this person do research???? And on my &^%$* dime!

Hamish Grant
January 31, 2013 7:13 pm

The best bit had to be “……to try to look at cause and effect, which is something that is rarely done in climate research”. So a climate scientist is happy to drop this as a throwaway line in a comment. I love it.

1 2 3 4