El Niño and La Niña events are the dominant modes of natural climate variability on Earth, which is why the state of the tropical Pacific is continuously monitored. El Niños and La Niñas impact weather patterns globally. As a number of recent papers have argued, the dominance of La Niña events in recent years is responsible for part of the cessation in global surface warming outside of the Arctic, so by inference, those papers are also stating that a string of strong El Niño events were responsible for part of the long-term warming from the mid-1970s to the turn of the century. There’s nothing new about that; for years we’ve been discussing the naturally occurring, sunlight-fueled processes that drive El Niño events and cause long-term warming of global surface temperatures. If this subject is new to you, see the link at the end of this post for an overview.
The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) provides the following summary of their ENSO forecasts in their January 30, 2014 El Niño/La Niña Update:
- ENSO conditions are currently neutral (neither El Niño nor La Niña);
- As of mid-January 2014, except for a small possibility for weak and brief La Niña development during the next couple of months, outlooks indicate likely continuation of neutral conditions into the second quarter of 2014;
- Current forecasts indicate approximately equal chances for neutral conditions or the development of a weak El Niño during the third quarter of 2014, reflecting increased chances for development of a weak El Niño.
It appears no one is suggesting that a full-fledged La Niña will form for the 2014/15 season. As of the week centered on February 5th, the sea surface temperature anomalies of the NINO3.4 region of the equatorial Pacific indicated that the tropical Pacific was experiencing La Niña conditions, though not an “official” La Niña. See the monthly sea surface temperature update for January 2014.
What’s your prediction? Please provide links to the variables you monitor. Here’s what I predict.
I predict, if we see El Niño conditions, global warming enthusiasts will cheer, because they have forecast, in turn, that record high global temperatures will accompany the next El Niño. And I predict, if we see La Niña or ENSO-neutral conditions, skeptics will cheer, because global surface temperatures should continue to remain flat. (Other than that, I don’t make predictions.)
The ENSO wrap-up from Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) for February 14, 2014 provides a similar loose forecast. (For those who live north of the equator, keep in mind the BOM is discussing austral seasons.)
And NOAA’s CPC has a similar mix of possible scenarios in their Weekly ENSO Update dated February 10, 2014—though the NCEP’s models are forecasting El Niño conditions starting in April-June 2014. See page 27.
The WMO briefly mentions the problems with ENSO predictions during this part of the year. They write:
It must be noted that model outlooks that span March-May period tend to have particularly lower skill than those made at other times of year. Hence some caution should be exercised when using long range outlooks made at this time for the middle of the year and beyond.
ENSO predictions at this time of year are hampered by a problem called the Spring Prediction Barrier. See the discussion at the IRI website here. But a series of new papers claim to have overcome that hurdle.
The recently published Ludescher et al (2014) Very Early Warning of Next El Niño (paywalled) are predicting El Niño conditions by late 2014. The abstract reads:
The most important driver of climate variability is the El Niño Southern Oscillation, which can trigger disasters in various parts of the globe. Despite its importance, conventional forecasting is still limited to 6 mo ahead. Recently, we developed an approach based on network analysis, which allows projection of an El Niño event about 1 y ahead. Here we show that our method correctly predicted the absence of El Niño events in 2012 and 2013 and now announce that our approach indicated (in September 2013 already) the return of El Niño in late 2014 with a 3-in-4 likelihood. We also discuss the relevance of the next El Niño to the question of global warming and the present hiatus in the global mean surface temperature.
Global warming enthusiasts have already started cheering for an El Niño. See the Michael Slezak article in NewScientist titled El Niño may make 2014 the hottest year on record. And Andrew Freedman of ClimateCentral begins his post Study Sounds ‘El Niño Alarm’ For Late This Year:
A new study shows that there is at least a 76 percent likelihood that an El Niño event will occur later this year, potentially reshaping global weather patterns for a year or more and raising the odds that 2015 will set a record for the warmest year since instrument records began in the late 19th century.
Ludescher et al (2014) appears to be based on Ludescher et al (2013) Improved El Niño forecasting by cooperativity detection (paywalled). We discussed the earlier Ludescher et al paper in the July 2013 post El Niño in the News. I closed that post with:
DID GLOBAL WARMING CAUSE THE EL NIÑOS OR DID EL NIÑOS CAUSE GLOBAL WARMING?
Numerous datasets indicate that El Niño events are fueled naturally. Additionally, satellite-era sea surface temperature records indicate that El Niño events are responsible for the warming of sea surface temperatures over the past 31 years, not vice versa as Li et al (2013) have suggested. If this topic is new to you, refer to my illustrated essay “The Manmade Global Warming Challenge” [42MB].
Gail Combs, you directed me here: http://theinconvenientskeptic.com/2012/05/the-science-of-why-the-theory-of-global-warming-is-incorrect/
I read that blog from time to time. I am not saying that particular argument is wrong, I am saying that it is incomplete, as with most of the other arguments that aim to derive predictions from the known science.
Pamela,
Have you been sunburned on a cloudy day yet? Only then will you truly understand that your SW penetrates clouds as efficiently as it penetrates the ocean.
Gymnosperm please read up on such matters. You are quite wrong.
Pippen Kool: You are predictable. The tropical Pacific is ALWAYS releasing heat from ocean to atmosphere: during El Niños and La Niñas. It is never sucking heat from the atmosphere. You’ve overlooked the primary way the tropical Pacific releases heat: through evaporation. Here’s a graph that compares latent and sensible heat fluxes from the tropical Pacific.
http://bobtisdale.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/figure-35.png
The latent heat released from the tropical Pacific dwarfs the sensible flux.
The graph is from the following post titled “La Niñas Do NOT Suck Heat from the Atmosphere”:
http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2013/11/25/la-ninas-do-not-suck-heat-from-the-atmosphere/
Regards
PS for Pippen Kool: BTW, your analysis is backwards. The Pacific releases less heat during La Ninas, which is why the delta T decreases.
Bob Tisdale says: “The tropical Pacific is ALWAYS releasing heat from ocean to atmosphere: during El Niños and La Niñas. It is never sucking heat from the atmosphere. You’ve overlooked the primary way the tropical Pacific releases heat: through evaporation.”
That is irrelevant to my initial comment of energy balance in the ENSO positive vs negative years. So if I put in your terms, during El Niño more energy comes out of the Pacific than during La Niña: your delta T between SST and airT says as much, that is, the bigger the delta the bigger the transfer of energy, physics 101. So whether I say that during La Niña the ocean is gaining more energy than El Niño (I admit that that was not the best way to say it), or if you say that during La Niña the ocean is releasing less energy than El Niño, at the end of the year, the balance sheet says the ocean gains in La Niña years … and the atmosphere gains in El Niño years.
And I was wondering did you ever check out that weird temperature spike that I was commenting on in my last post? The one from 2012 to now?
Bob Tisdale says: “BTW, your analysis is backwards. The Pacific releases less heat during La Ninas, which is why the delta T decreases.”
Pippen Kool said: ” Hence, more energy is sucked from the surface in El Niño conditions than in La Niña conditions.”
I think I got that part correct at least! And I think we agree.
Now you have time to look into that weird temp spike! How do I post a picture here, I should learn how to do that…
gymnosperm says:
February 17, 2014 at 6:50 pm
No,
http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/explorations/04deepscope/background/deeplight/media/diagram3_600.jpg
http://las.physik.uni-oldenburg.de/images/uwlight.gif
It penetrates over 100m depending on the wavelength.
“Values of the same order were found for the depths of the maximal concentration of chlorophyll a, which varied between 45 and 100 m during midnight and between 70 and 110 m during noon.”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967064502000930
Chlorophyll needs sunlight to survive, so wouldn’t be growing at those depths without it.
Matt G,
Huh? I totally agree it penetrates the water. I’m saying it also penetrates the clouds. Clouds are water. Talking UV. High energy photons, not so many of them. Total energy falls off sharply above the visible range. Fatter tail in the IR side.
Still argue clouds net increase surface temperature. Nino=clouds, thus amplifying the atmospheric warming effect of Ninos.
gymnosperm says:
February 18, 2014 at 11:57 am
Matt G,
Huh? I totally agree it penetrates the water. I’m saying it also penetrates the clouds. Clouds are water. Talking UV. High energy photons, not so many of them. Total energy falls off sharply above the visible range. Fatter tail in the IR side.
Still argue clouds net increase surface temperature. Nino=clouds, thus amplifying the atmospheric warming effect of Ninos.
—————————————————————————————————————–
Thanks for the explanation, just thought you would have known that some forms of clouds can prevent majority, if not all solar radiation reaching the surface.
Solar radiation sensors detect the levels well at ground level and it is true they penetrate especially high clouds, medium level clouds poorly and low clouds very poorly. It is possible to get sun burn on a cloudy day especially if exposed in it all the time to high/medium level clouds or high up on a mountain. Stratus, Stratocumulus and especially Cumulonimbus clouds are typical low level clouds that can prevent nearly all solar radiation reaching the surface if not all.
Scientific evidence shows that while global clouds have declined during satellite era, global temperatures have increased. While global cloud levels have increased global temperatures have declined especially with medium and low level clouds.
http://climate4you.com/images/TotalCloudCoverVersusGlobalSurfaceAirTemperature.gif
Matt,
Thank you. I had not seen that. I suspect what it means is that visible light is very important in warming the surface. If you dive all, you know it goes down in water pretty far. I think it penetrates your skin as far as UV.
My suspicion was that a lot of visible light was reflected from the ocean surface. Whitecaps are essentially clouds. None of the major greenhouse gasses absorb visible light
.
I guess I stand corrected, although I still insist that when Ninos evaporate a lot of water, they are lobbing a lot of the granddaddy of greenhouse gasses right in the strike zone of incoming IR bands that are not saturated.
Matt,
P.S., if clouds absorbed all solar radiation it would be completely dark.
gymnosperm, you might be interested in the following tutorial:
http://oceansjsu.com/105d/exped_briny/1.html
gymnosperm says:
February 18, 2014 at 10:20 pm
When day becomes night has often been observed and this refers when there is no solar radiation reaching the surface. Total darkness only occurs with a huge area with no solar radiation and only thing that comes close is a supercell or huge hurricane. At dusk with sun below the horizon still takes a while for total darkness. Scattering of light from many miles away prevents total darkness, but on the regions affected directly no solar radiation is measured.
“My suspicion was that a lot of visible light was reflected from the ocean surface.”
Not enough to prevent visible light reaching below 100 m in the deep ocean. (390nm-750nm)
“I guess I stand corrected, although I still insist that when Ninos evaporate a lot of water, they are lobbing a lot of the granddaddy of greenhouse gasses right in the strike zone of incoming IR bands that are not saturated.”
I don’t think you will find any infrared bands closely above the deep ocean that are not saturated.
“The observations indicate a great variability in the humidity gradient between heights of 6 m and 30 m and a relatively small variability in the difference between the vapor pressures at the sea surface and at 6 m.”
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/1520-0469(1946)003%3C0001:THGOTS%3E2.0.CO%3B2
Forgot to mention that clouds don’t absorb all the solar radiation because a lot of it is reflected.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Clouds/
“Real-time model predictions of ENSO conditions during the 2002–11 period are evaluated and compared to skill levels documented in studies of the 1990s. ENSO conditions are represented by the Niño- 3.4 SST index in the east-central tropical Pacific. The skills of 20 prediction models (12 dynamical, 8 statistical) are examined. Results indicate skills somewhat lower than those found for the less advanced models of the 1980s and 1990s. Using hindcasts spanning 1981–2011, this finding is explained by the relatively greater predictive challenge posed by the 2002–11 period and suggests that decadal variations in the character of ENSO variability are a greater skill-determining factor than the steady but gradual trend toward improved ENSO prediction science and models. After adjusting for the varying difficulty level, the skills of 2002–11 are slightly higher than those of earlier decades. Unlike earlier results, the average skill of dynamical models slightly, but statistically significantly, exceeds that of statistical models for start times just before the middle of the year when prediction has proven most difficult. The greater skill of dynamical models is largely attributable to the subset of dynamical models with the most advanced, highresolution, fully coupled ocean–atmosphere prediction systems using sophisticated data assimilation systems and large ensembles. This finding suggests that additional advances in skill remain likely, with the expected implementation of better physics, numeric and assimilation schemes, finer resolution, and larger ensemble sizes.”
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00111.1
ENSO forecasts, awful and apparently getting worse…