While NASA GISS is offline, there’s no shutdown at UAH. From Dr. Roy Spencer:
The Version 5.6 global average lower tropospheric temperature (LT) anomaly for September, 2013 is +0.37 deg. C (click for larger version):
The global, hemispheric, and tropical LT anomalies from the 30-year (1981-2010) average for the last 21 months are:
YR MON GLOBAL NH SH TROPICS
2012 1 -0.145 -0.088 -0.203 -0.245
2012 2 -0.140 -0.016 -0.263 -0.326
2012 3 +0.033 +0.064 +0.002 -0.238
2012 4 +0.230 +0.346 +0.114 -0.251
2012 5 +0.178 +0.338 +0.018 -0.102
2012 6 +0.244 +0.378 +0.111 -0.016
2012 7 +0.149 +0.263 +0.035 +0.146
2012 8 +0.210 +0.195 +0.225 +0.069
2012 9 +0.369 +0.376 +0.361 +0.174
2012 10 +0.367 +0.326 +0.409 +0.155
2012 11 +0.305 +0.319 +0.292 +0.209
2012 12 +0.229 +0.153 +0.305 +0.199
2013 1 +0.496 +0.512 +0.481 +0.387
2013 2 +0.203 +0.372 +0.033 +0.195
2013 3 +0.200 +0.333 +0.067 +0.243
2013 4 +0.114 +0.128 +0.101 +0.165
2013 5 +0.083 +0.180 -0.015 +0.112
2013 6 +0.295 +0.335 +0.255 +0.220
2013 7 +0.173 +0.134 +0.212 +0.074
2013 8 +0.158 +0.111 +0.206 +0.009
2013 9 +0.367 +0.342 +0.392 +0.192
The Effect of Convective Oscillations On Tropospheric Temperature
I sometimes get asked why the tropospheric temperature variations are so large on a month-to-month basis. As I have mentioned before, these are usually due to natural oscillations in convective heat transfer from the ocean surface to the atmosphere. Just how large are these variations? The global average rate of energy transfer by moist convection (precipitation systems) has been estimated to be around 100 Watts per sq. meter. Since satellite (SSM/I) measurements of global oceanic rainfall have a monthly standard deviation of 3%, this equates to ~3 W/m2 monthly variations in convective heating of the troposphere. A quick calculation using the heat capacity of air will show that 3 W/m2 of more (or less) heating will raise (or lower) the tropospheric temperature by about 0.2 deg. C (assuming no other energy exchanges are affected). This is indeed the approximate size of the month-to-month variations in tropospheric temperature that we observe.
Note: In the previous version (v5.5, still provided to NOAA due to contract with NCDC) the temps are slightly cooler, probably due to the uncorrected diurnal drift of NOAA-18. Recall that in v5.6, we include METOP-A and NOAA-19, and since June 2013 they are the only two satellites in the v5.6 dataset, whereas v5.5 does not include METOP-A and NOAA-19.
Popular monthly data files:
uahncdc_lt_5.6.txt (Lower Troposphere)
uahncdc_mt_5.6.txt (Mid-Troposphere)
uahncdc_ls_5.6.txt (Lower Stratosphere)
From the UAH press release by Phil gentry and John Christy:
Global climate trend since Nov. 16, 1978: +0.14 C per decade
September temperatures (preliminary)
Global composite temp.: +0.37 C (about 0.67 degrees Fahrenheit) above 30-year average for September.
Northern Hemisphere: +0.34 C (about 0.61 degrees Fahrenheit) above 30-year average for September.
Southern Hemisphere: +0.39 C (about 0.70 degrees Fahrenheit) above 30-year average for September.
Tropics: +0.19 C (about 0.34 degrees Fahrenheit) above 30-year average for September.
August temperatures (revised):
Global Composite: +0.16 C above 30-year average
Northern Hemisphere: +0.11 C above 30-year average
Southern Hemisphere: +0.21 C above 30-year average
Tropics: +0.01 C above 30-year average
(All temperature anomalies are based on a 30-year average (1981-2010) for the month reported.)
Notes on data released Oct. 3, 2013:
Compared to seasonal norms, in September the coolest area on the globe was south of South Africa in the southern ocean, where temperatures in the troposphere were about 2.49 C (about 4.48 degrees F) cooler than normal, said Dr. John Christy, a professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center (ESSC) at The University of Alabama in Huntsville. The warmest area was in the Wilkes Land area of the east Antarctic, where tropospheric temperatures were 5.20 C (about 9.4 degrees F) warmer than seasonal norms.
Archived color maps of local temperature anomalies are available on-line at:
As part of an ongoing joint project between UAH, NOAA and NASA, Christy and Dr. Roy Spencer, an ESSC principal scientist, use data gathered by advanced microwave sounding units on NOAA and NASA satellites to get accurate temperature readings for almost all regions of the Earth. This includes remote desert, ocean and rain forest areas where reliable climate data are not otherwise available.
The satellite-based instruments measure the temperature of the atmosphere from the surface up to an altitude of about eight kilometers above sea level. Once the monthly temperature data is collected and processed, it is placed in a “public” computer file for immediate access by atmospheric scientists in the U.S. and abroad.
Neither Christy nor Spencer receives any research support or funding from oil, coal or industrial companies or organizations, or from any private or special interest groups. All of their climate research funding comes from federal and state grants or contracts.
— 30 —
probably due to the uncorrected diurnal drift of NOAA-18.
Does everything have to be retroactively corrected?
Strange, HADCET was pretty cool..
http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/hadcet-september-2013-only-128-years-were-warmer-2/
Latitude, if you know a way to correct problems BEFORE they happen, I’d like to know. 😉 It usually takes months of retrospective data before a problem becomes obvious. Then, you have to decide the best way to fix it, etc.
Why is temperature reported as an anomaly?
That indicate that a normal temperature exists.
Why not just report temperature in: Kelvin K in accordance with the International System of Units?
Roy Spencer says:
Gosh, that’s an easy one Dr. Spencer. Just project the problems with a GCM. Voila!
/sarc
IPCC can do it!!! They can do anything with numbers!
These monthly UAH reports are informative, but a little dry.
They would be a lot more entertaining if, say, there was a third or fourth order polynomial best-fit to them, so that we could get a feel for what the trend to date looks like.
🙂
September was indeed above “normal” where I watch temps (mid-continent, US).
It’s good to see my tracking system agrees with UAH–I must be doing something right….
Sorry. The NOAA NOMADS system didn’t update this week, so I don’t have a preliminary September 2013 sea surface temperature update. The most-recent update was for Mid-September, using weekly data:
http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2013/09/25/mid-september-2013-sea-surface-temperature-anomaly-update/
Additionally, Jo Nova asked me to throw together a few questions the media should be asking the IPCC. Here are my suggested questions about the hiatus:
http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/questions-the-media-should-be-asking-the-ipcc-the-hiatus-in-warming/
And Joanne’s cross post:
http://joannenova.com.au/2013/10/bob-tisdale-six-questions-the-media-should-be-asking-the-ipcc/
Regards
Having watched the northern sea surface temps running “warm” for the whole of September the global increase from last month is not a surprise. However the NH being lower than the SH is.
For the first 2 weeks to 18th Reynolds SST had NH running at approx +0.50C and the SH at around +0.10C?
http://weather.unisys.com/surface/sfc_daily.php?plot=ssa&inv=0&t=cur
http://nomad1.ncep.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/pdisp_sst.sh
“Latitude, if you know a way to correct problems BEFORE they happen, I’d like to know. ;-)”
Simple, design better tools. Been the way of things since man started thinking a chunk of rock was a good hammer.
“problems”……is that code for retroactively adjusting temperatures?
sorry, I’m over sensitive to all these re-writing history adjustments…I guess
Definitely felt 3/10th of a degree warmer than usual.
Latitude: “sorry, I’m over sensitive to all these re-writing history adjustments…I guess”
AP — Today was the official publication of the eagerly awaited experiment from Michelson and Morely that confirmed the Aether Theory. Morley stated, “This is exciting confirmation of physics with great importance to understanding how aether torque effects the atmosphere and climate.”
When asked his response to Professor Einstein’s claims that the team had manufactured their data, he responded, “Well let me be clear, Einstein is a teacher, not a physicist. He’s well known for his physics-denial and pseudo-scientific papers. If he were a scientist he would know that these adjustments were necessary to correct differential aether dragging and vortices that arise from asymmetries of mass and geometry in the interferometer.”
Speaking of future plans, Morely enthused that “The results were suprisingly not perfectly expected and we are eagerly awaiting the next round of grant funding to further our knowledge of the Aether and it’s impacts on human life.”
The second figure is interesting. There seems to be a relatively flat period ubtil the el Nino event and then a second relatively flat period. I’m sure this has been commented on many times but it is very visually striking in this plot.
The implication is that a linear fit to the entire record is obviously inappropriate because the residual would not be randomly distributed around the “best fit” line. Again, I’m sure this has been pointed out many times but it hadn’t struck me so forcibly. To say that this is natural variation imposed on a linear increase doesn’t really add to our understanding.
The lack of hurricanes hoisting huge amounts of heat up to the verge of the stratosphere, where some can be gobbled up by outer space, may be keeping us a bit warmer, however I suspect that the result will be a warmer Atlantic ocean, which will clash with arctic outbreaks, and give us some really big east coast nor’easters, (and those things get even huger when they get up to Labrador, where few live.) That will balance things out.
[snip – way off topic and off color – Anthony]
Mr. Spencer,
You say that the heating in the atmosphere is due to increased convection (I agree), Would a series of Hurricanes and Typhoons cause a net heating or cooling by comparison?
The anomaly is up! Head for the hills! The Killer Warmth is a-comin’!
Jquip says:
October 3, 2013 at 2:31 pm
The Michelson Morley experiment was conducted at my alma mater in 1887, a short time before I attended that school, as my children would say, and it gave evidence that there was no aether, which gave rise to the original concepts of relativity. I am therefore confused by your quotes and assume they are tongue in cheek.
Isn’t it time to drop the “Mt. Pinatubo cooling” label?
The lower troposphere warming trend going back to 1958 versus the IPCC hindcast/forecast from 1860 to 2100.
Discrepancies are apparent.
http://s8.postimg.org/ndzekc3t1/Lower_Trop_Warming_Trend_1850_2100_Sept13.png
Bill Illis says:
October 3, 2013 at 5:03 pm
1. But doesn’t that graph leave open what the spikes down were in 1883 and 1904 – if volcanoes were properly edited out of the trend?
2. Is the 0,0 point set at 1952?
Jim G — “I am therefore confused by your quotes and assume they are tongue in cheek.”
Rather, that’s what we would expect from Michelson-Morley if they practiced science in 1887 as they do today.
WOW! 370 thousandths of a degree.
Did I detect It?
Yes a Fly landed on me,and soon took off.