The Thermostatic Throttle

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach

I have theorized that the reflective nature of the tropical clouds, in particular those of the inter-tropical convergence zone (ITCZ) just above the equator, functions as the “throttle” on the global climate engine. We’re all familiar with what a throttle does, because the gas pedal on your car controls the throttle. The throttle on any heat engine controls the running conditions by limiting (throttling) the amount of incoming energy.

Similarly, in the climate heat engine, the throttle is the tropical albedo (reflectivity). The tropical albedo controls how much incoming solar energy is rejected back to space at the hot end of the heat engine. In other words, the albedo throttles the incoming energy to control the entire system.

I have further said that the tropical albedo is a threshold-based and extremely non-linear function of the temperature. So I thought I’d use the CERES satellite data to take a look at how strong this climate throttle is in watts per square metre (W/m2), and exactly where the throttle is located. If such a throttle exists, one of its characteristic features would be that the amount of solar energy reflected must increase with increasing temperature. Figure 1 shows the results of that analysis.

changes in reflected solar per one degree increaseFigure 1. Average change in reflected solar from a 1° increase in surface temperature. Red areas show greater reflection with increasing temperature. The change in reflected energy is calculated on a per-gridcell basis as the change in albedo per 1° temperature increase for that gridcell, times the average solar radiation for that gridcell. Gray line shows zero change in albedo with temperature. Dotted lines show the tropics (23.45°N/S) and the Arctic/Antarctic circles (66.55°N/S).

Clearly, then, such a throttle mechanism exists. It is also where we would expect to find it, located near the Equator where the maximum energy is entering the system. On average, the throttle operates in the areas enclosed by the gray line. I was surprised by the strength of the mechanism, however. There are large areas (red) where a one degree C warming in temperature increases the solar reflection by 10 W/m2 or more. Obviously, this thermostatically controlled throttle would be a factor in explaining the observations of a hard upper open ocean temperature of about 30°C.

The throttle mechanism is operating over much of the tropical oceans and even some parts of the tropical land. It is strongest in the ITCZ, which runs below the Equator in the Indian Ocean and over Africa, and above the Equator in the Pacific and Atlantic.

Next, it is worth noting that overall the effect of temperature on solar reflections is about zero (global area-weighted average is -1.5 W/m2 per degree, which is smaller than the uncertainty in the data). In addition, large areas of both the land and the ocean in the extra-tropics are quite similar, in that they are all just slightly negative (light orange). This is another indication that we have a thermoregulatory system at work. Since over much of the planetary surface the albedo is relatively insensitive to changes in temperature, small changes in temperature in the tropics can have a large effect on the amount of energy that is entering the system. Figure 2 shows the relationship (land only) between absolute temperature in °C, and the change in reflected energy per degree of warming.

change reflected solar energy over land per degree temp vs tempFigure 2. Change in reflected solar (W/m2 per °C) versus absolute surface temperature (°C) over the land. Note that where the annual temperature averages below freezing (0°C), there is little variation in surface reflection with temperature. From freezing to about 20°C, the amount reflected is generally dropping as temperatures increase. Above about 20°C, there are two kinds of responses—sizeable increases or sizeable decreases in reflected solar with temperature.

Next, over the oceans the areas near the poles show the reverse of the behavior in the tropics. While the tropical albedo changes cool the tropics, near the poles as the surface warms, the albedo and the reflected sunshine decreases with increasing temperatures.

change reflected solar energy over ocean per degree temp vs tempFigure 3. Change in reflected solar (W/m2 per °C) versus absolute surface temperature (°C) over the ocean, annual averages. Where the annual temperature averages near freezing, there is strong negative variation in surface reflection with temperature. From freezing to about 20°C, the variation is stable and slightly negative. Above about 20°C, there are two kinds of responses—sizeable increases or sizeable decreases in reflected solar with temperature, up to the hard limit at 30°C

What this means is that in addition to limiting overall energy input to the entire system, the temperature-related albedo-mediated changes in reflected sunlight tend to make the tropics cooler, and the poles warmer, than they would be otherwise. Clearly this would tend to limit the overall temperature swings of the planet.

Finally, the use of monthly averages obscures an important point, which is that the changes in tropical albedo occur on the time scale of minutes, not months. And on a daily scale, there is no overall 10 W/m2 per degree of temperature change. Instead, up to a certain time of day there are no clouds, and the full energy of the sun is entering the system. During that time, there is basically no change in tropical albedo with increasing temperature.

Then, on average around 11 am, within a half hour or so the albedo takes a huge jump as the cumulus clouds emerge and form a fully-developed cumulus regime. This makes a step change in the albedo, and can even drive the temperature down despite increasing solar forcing, as I showed herehere,  here, here, and here

From this we see that the thermal regulation of tropical albedo is occurring via changes in the time of the daily onset and the strength of the cumulus/cumulonimbus regime. The hotter the surface on that day, the earlier the cumulus and cumulonimbus clouds will form, and the more of them there will be. This reduces the amount of energy entering the system by hundreds of watts per square metre. And on the other hand, during cooler days, cumulus form later in the day, cumulonimbus may not form at all, and there are fewer clouds. This increases the energy entering the system by hundreds of W/m2.

I bring this up to emphasize that the system is not applying an average throttle of e.g. 10 W/m2 over the average area where the throttle operates.

Instead, it is applying a much larger throttle, of a couple hundred watts/square metre, but it is only applying the throttle as and where it is needed in order to cool down local hot-spots, or to warm up local cold spots. As a result, the averages are misleading.

The final reason that it is important to understand that the albedo changes are HOURLY changes, not monthly average changes, is that what rules the system are instantaneous conditions controlling cloud emergence, not average conditions. Clouds do not form based on how much forcing there is, whether the forcing is from solar or CO2 or volcanoes. They form only when the temperatures are high enough.

And this means that things won’t change much if the forcing changes … because the cloud emergence thresholds are temperature-based, and not forcing-based.

I hold that this immediate response is the main reason that it is so hard to find e.g. a solar signal in the temperature record—because the thermoregulation is temperature based, not forcing based, and thus operates regardless of changes in forcing.

This is also the reason that volcanoes make so little difference in the global temperature—because the system responds immediately to cooling temperatures by reducing albedo, opening the thermostatically controlled-throttle to allow the entry of hundreds of extra W/m2 to counteract the drop in temperature.

There is plenty more to mine from the CERES dataset, and although I’ve mined some of it, I still haven’t done lots of things with it—an analysis of the efficiency of the climate heat engine, for example. However, I think this clear demonstration of the existence of a temperature-regulated throttle controlling the amount of energy entering the climate system is important enough to merit a post on its own.

Best regards to all on a sunny December day,

w.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

167 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Gregg Weber
December 28, 2013 9:32 pm

Is there a corolation between this and the movements of plates over this band?
I haven’t had the time to read the whole article so you might have already answered that question. Sorry.
[Best to read, think, pause and consider, then write. 8<) Mod]

Michael D
December 28, 2013 9:54 pm

Very interesting, and potentially very important. Thank you.
Given that the thermostat ensures (as any good thermostat does) that the average temperature remains approximately constant regardless of the forcing, then this raises the following question: what causes the “temperature setting” of the thermostat to change? I.e. what causes the yellow dots in Figure 3 to shift to the right or the left? Could it be the overall humidity of the atmosphere? But presumably that is controlled by a mechanism very similar to your thermostat? Is there some component of the thermostat that has a very-long-time period resonance, causing climatic variations?

December 28, 2013 9:59 pm

Aren’t cumulonimbus clouds a huge heat engine on their own, absorbing heat by evaporation and taking it up to the of the troposphere to be released by condensation.

climateace
December 28, 2013 10:04 pm

I am not a climatologist’s pimple, but:
(1) Any speculation by way of heat engine analogies would have to be for open systems, not closed systems, such as the earth’s climate system.
(2) The test for this speculation might be measurements of radiation in v radiation out, through, for example, CERES.
PS, please send lots of cumulonimbus to Australia. We are having our hottest year on record, apparently.

Bob Weber
December 28, 2013 10:06 pm

A throttle that acts as a thermostat is very interesting. Hook that in with Svensmark’s ideas on solar/cosmic cloud generation along with recent GEC findings, and this could be going places.

climateace
December 28, 2013 10:07 pm

dang!
(1) Any speculation by way of heat engine analogies would have to be for open heat engine systems, in order to be consistent with the earth’s climate system which is an open system.

Ian Wilson
December 28, 2013 10:36 pm

Climateace,
I think that Willis is talking about open heat engine system, otherwise he would not be talking of limiting the energy input using a thermostatic regulatory mechanism.

MattS
December 28, 2013 11:18 pm

climateace,
“PS, please send lots of cumulonimbus to Australia. We are having our hottest year on record, apparently.”
That must be why an eco-tourism / global warming publicity stunt expedition got stuck in the sea ice in the middle of SH summer. I saw a report that the Chinese Ice Breaker was forced to turn back because they couldn’t make any headway. Maybe you should send some of your excess heat their way.

climateace
December 28, 2013 11:22 pm

Someone commented that mediaeval Iceland was some sort of idyllic stateless nirvana. It may have been so for the Norsemen.
For their thralls it would have been hell on earth.

Andrew W
December 28, 2013 11:23 pm

Maybe I’m missing something, but if we’re talking about a change, from when to when?

climateace
December 28, 2013 11:24 pm

MS
[climateace,
“PS, please send lots of cumulonimbus to Australia. We are having our hottest year on record, apparently.”
That must be why an eco-tourism / global warming publicity stunt expedition got stuck in the sea ice in the middle of SH summer. I saw a report that the Chinese Ice Breaker was forced to turn back because they couldn’t make any headway. Maybe you should send some of your excess heat their way.]
LOL. The silly things cherrypicked the wrong place at the wrong time!

Santa
December 28, 2013 11:29 pm

It acts like a cars thermostat. It stays closed and keep’s most of the energy in the system, some energy is lost due to radiation from the surface of the engine.
Then when the temperature of the coolant reaches a threshold it opens and surplus energy is more effectively lost from the car’s radiator.
If the temperature goes below the threshold it closes and energy is no longer lost from the radiator.
This engine is the ocean and atmosphere.
What drives, energy, this engine is the sun.

sophocles
December 28, 2013 11:30 pm

The `throttle’ being over the tropical oceans is no big surprise. Is there any correlation with ocean currents? ie; could they assist with sensitivity, forcing, etc?

Santa
December 28, 2013 11:32 pm

“PS, please send lots of cumulonimbus to Australia. We are having our hottest year on record, apparently.”
UN kan help you with your weather if you just sign a climate treaty?

markx
December 28, 2013 11:39 pm

Great thinking as usual from Willis.
How would the first chart look with the reflected solar shown as a percent of either TOA incoming, or better, surface incoming energy?
Given the dramatically lower insolation as we move towards the poles.

Eugene WR Gallun
December 28, 2013 11:51 pm

By George, i think he’s got it
Eugene WR Gallun

eco-geek
December 28, 2013 11:56 pm

I hate to get political but surely the IPCC have included this obvious (when you spend a little time looking at the data) powerfull thermoregulatory mechanism in their various reports? Otherwise they (and the reports) would lack credibility.
What models did they use when modelling the thermoregulatory cloud formation mechanisms?
What data did they use when modelling the thermoregulatory cloud formation mechanisms?
How do their models and real world data compare?
There is an interesting correspondence between the “Ocean” graph and the V/I curve for a Zenner diode. Does this mean the IPCC are forward biased?

Mushroom George
December 29, 2013 12:05 am

“The final reason that it is important to understand that the albedo changes are HOURLY changes, not monthly average changes, is that what rules the system are instantaneous conditions controlling cloud emergence, not average conditions.’
OK sort of. Hourly is not instantaneous, hourly is also an average that misleads. With a clear sky at noon on the equator you get the full 1366 w/m2.

dp
December 29, 2013 12:07 am

There is something that supports this claim but is, unfortunately, the result of a model, at least in the example I’ll provide. It serves to show the point. The thermostat, indeed the entire hypothesis depends upon the location of the sun relative to the earth’s surface. The tropics is where it all starts, as stated. What this implies is that the greatest affect is where the sun is directly overhead, and one presumes there is some lead/lag which we see in the event time starting at about 11:00 am, local time. Having spent some time in the tropics that is also my experience. And this necessarily causes to a seasonal north/south movement of greatest cloud density owing to the position of the sun changing through the year. Northern summers should exhibit a denser band of cloud formations north of the equator, and so too for the southern summer exhibiting bands of clouds south of the equator. Fall and spring should exhibit greatest cloud density at the equator.
So to the “evidence”. This video shows this exact latitudinal movement of the densest band of equatorial clouds in accordance with the changing seasons: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qh011eAYjAA
To expose this one has to grab the video time index mark at the bottom of the video with the mouse pointer and drag the time line quickly left and right. You should observe the cloud band moving per the consequences of Willis’ hypothesis north and south, in accordance with the seasons. And note too that the northern summer is in the central portion of the video time line.
There may also be actual satellite imagery that will also reveal this and which will remove any bias in the model that created the linked video.
The fact that this annual latitude shift of the densest cloud band exists actually leads to Willis’ hypothesis as one possibility. And it is a really beautiful video. Astute viewers should also see streamers flowing from the main sequence to the upper latitudes. This is energy being moved toward the poles.

H2O ruins stuff too
December 29, 2013 12:08 am

Governor would be a more accurate mechanical metaphor.

Duster
December 29, 2013 12:48 am

eco-geek says:
December 28, 2013 at 11:56 pm
I hate to get political but surely the IPCC have included this obvious (when you spend a little time looking at the data) powerfull thermoregulatory mechanism in their various reports? Otherwise they (and the reports) would lack credibility.
What models did they use when modelling the thermoregulatory cloud formation mechanisms?
What data did they use when modelling the thermoregulatory cloud formation mechanisms?
How do their models and real world data compare?
There is an interesting correspondence between the “Ocean” graph and the V/I curve for a Zenner diode. Does this mean the IPCC are forward biased?

Did you mislay a /sarc tag? The poor manner in which the GCMs handle clouds and water vapour is a long-standing common place in the climate debate. I would suggest that it is arguable that CO2 was selected as the “keystone” for these models, not because it was clearly important, but instead, because it was the “easiest” element to model that had well understood physical properties. A “lazy” or “desperate” climatologist syndrome so to speak. Clouds in particular are complex if not outright chaotic systems and are essentially impossible to model well. Worse, Willis points out that clouds react on hourly time scales. That places clouds into the “micro” scale was far as weather is concerned, effectively would force modelers into the position of attempting to derive climate from weather, rather than the other way around. That would forbid fortune telling on the grand scale the IPCC has been working toward.

eco-geek
December 29, 2013 12:50 am

On the Zenner analogy and forward biasing I should perhaps have made it clear that I meant voltage to be the analogue of temperature, the analogue of current being currency (units $ or Yuan where t > AR6)……

Steve C
December 29, 2013 12:52 am

eco-geek says: (December 28, 11:56 pm)
… “There is an interesting correspondence between the “Ocean” graph and the V/I curve for a Zenner diode. Does this mean the IPCC are forward biased?”
No, no, like the Zener diode in its usual circuit they’re back biased! In the IPCC’s case, back to mediaeval feudalism.
OTOH, as Willis points out, this “hydrological Zener” serves just as effective a stabilisation function as its electronic counterpart, to the good of the planet’s biological subcircuitry.

AJB
December 29, 2013 1:13 am

bobl
December 29, 2013 1:18 am

Willis what occurs to me here is there are two opposing thermoregulatory effects here. One oppossing inbound energy in the tropics, and one opposing outbound energy at the poles. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the pattern repeat at the boundaries of the dominant hadley cells, either. Though your graph doesnt seem to indicate that.
What do you think?

1 2 3 7
Verified by MonsterInsights