Three Clocks

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach

I got to wandering through the three main datasets that make up the overall CERES data, and I noticed an odd thing. The three main datasets are the all-sky downwelling solar, upwelling reflected solar, and upwelling longwave radiation, measured in watts per square metre (W/m2). Here are those three datasets:

ceres three main datasets actualFigure 1 the three main datasets that make up the CERES all-sky data. Note that as you’d expect, total input (solar ~340 W/m2) equals total output (100 W/m2 reflected plus 240 W/m2 radiation).

What I’d never noticed before is that the three datasets are all running on different clocks. One peaks in December, one peaks in January, and one peaks in July. Not only that, they all have different cycles of rising and falling … go figure.

A word of foreshadowing. I have no particular point to make in this post. Instead, it is a meander, an appreciative inquiry into the components of the shortwave (solar) and longwave (thermal infrared) top-of-atmosphere radiation. And at the end of the day, I suspect you’ll find it contains more questions and wonderment and curiosities than it has answers and insights. So hop on board, the boat’s leaving the dock, there’s a forecast of increasing uncertainty with a chance of scattered befuddlement … what’s not to like?

First, the solar input. Although a lot of folks talk about the “solar constant”, over the course of the year the sun is anything but constant. Because the Earth’s orbit is not circular, annually the Earth moves closer and further from the sun. This gives an annual change of about 22 W/m2, with a high point in early January and a low point exactly six months later in early July. So that’s one clock—peaks in January, bottoms out in July, six months rise, six months fall.

top of atmosphere solar radiation ceres global actual loessFigure 2. Downwelling solar. Top panel shows actual data. Middle panel shows the regular seasonal variation. The bottom panel shows the residual, calculated as the data minus the seasonal component. Horizontal gold dashed lines show ± one standard deviation of the residual data. This range encompasses about 2/3 of the data. Vertical dashed and dotted lines show January (dashed) and July (dotted).

The sun, of course, is very stable, so the actual variation looks just like the seasonal variation. Note that the standard deviation of the residuals is only about plus or minus a tenth of a watt, which is a variation of about 0.03%, three hundredths of one percent of the size of the signal. In passing, the cyclical variation of about ± 0.03% you see highlighted by the blue line in the bottom panel is the TSI (total solar irradiation) variation associated with the sunspot cycle … but I digress, if one can do that while aimlessly meandering …

The next dataset, reflected solar, is on a slightly different clock. While reflected solar naturally varies with the strength of the sun, it actually peaks in December rather than January.

top of atmosphere reflected solar ceres global actual loessFigure 3. Reflected (upwelling) solar. Top panel shows actual data. Middle panel shows the regular seasonal variation. The bottom panel shows the residual, calculated as the data minus the seasonal component. Horizontal gold dashed lines show ± one standard deviation of the residual data. This range encompasses about 2/3 of the data.  Vertical dashed and dotted lines show January (dashed) and July (dotted).

To me, this is a very curious signal. To start with, it is at a minimum in August, and a maximum in December. So it rises quickly for four months, then falls for eight months, and repeats. Odd.

In addition, it’s curious because it is so stable. Of the three datasets (downwelling solar, reflected solar, and longwave), the reflected solar is the only one that is unconstrained. The downwelling solar is basically fixed. And the upwelling longwave is physically constrained—in the long run (although not the short run) what goes out is limited by what goes in.

But the variations in reflected solar, both geographical and temporal, are not fixed. Given the varying annual snow, ice, and cloud cover in the polar regions, plus the varying tropical cloud cover, plus the differences in clouds over the extra-tropical areas, there’s nothing obvious that constrains reflected sunlight to be the same, year after year … and yet, as Figure 3 shows, the standard deviation of the residuals is only half a watt per square metre, that’s plus or minus half a percent. And that means that 95% of the months are within one watt of the seasonal average to me. To me, that’s a wonder.

Finally, here is the longwave. Upwelling longwave is basically a function of temperature, so it peaks in the northern hemisphere summer. Of the three datasets, longwave varies the least over the course of the year.

top of atmosphere upwelling longwave ceres global actual loessFigure 4. Upwelling longwave radiation. Top panel shows actual data. Middle panel shows the regular seasonal variation. The bottom panel shows the residual, calculated as the data minus the seasonal component. Horizontal gold dashed lines show ± one standard deviation of the residual data. This range encompasses about 2/3 of the data.  Vertical dashed and dotted lines show January (dashed) and July (dotted).

Again, we see only a small variation in the residuals, only ± half a watt per square metre, or about ± 0.2%, two tenths of a percent of the size of the signal. And again the signal is not symmetrical, with the peak in July and the minimum five months later in December. So globally, longwave rises for seven months, then drops for five months.

Having looked at that, I got curious about the strange shape of the seasonal variations in the reflected solar. So I decided to take a look at the latitudinal variations in the solar, reflected solar, longwave, and albedo.

area weighted simple toa radiation by latitudeFigure 5. Top of atmosphere (TOA) radiation by latitude. Area weighted. Note the units are terawatts (10^12 watts) per degree of latitude. Area-weighting is done using the official CERES latitude areas, which are for an oblate spheroid rather than a sphere. It makes no visible or numerical difference at this scale, but Gavin Schmidt busted me for not using it, and he’s right, so why not use the recommended data? The radiation in W/m2 is averaged for each degree of latitude. That average value is multiplied by the surface area of the degree of latitude (in square metres / ° latitude). The square metres cancel out, and we are left with watts per degree of latitude. 

You can see the increased reflection from 0-10°N of the Equator. This is the sunlight reflecting from the massed cumulonimbus of the Inter-Tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ). These tropical thunderstorms of the ITCZ provide the power driving the global equator-to-pole circulation of the atmosphere and the ocean. The increased reflection from 0-10°N is important because of the strength of the incoming sunshine. Half of the incoming TOA solar energy strikes the planet between 25°N and 25°S.

It’s also clear that the albedo in the southern polar regions is much higher than that of the northern polar regions. To investigate the effects of that difference on the radiation datasets, I decided to re-do Figure 5, the radiation by latitude, and look at the differences between June and December. Figure 6 shows June (darker of each pair of lines) and December (lighter lines) for the TOA solar, reflected, and longwave radiation.

area weighted jun dec toa radiation by latitudeFigure 6. As in Figure 5 (without albedo), but for June and December. For each pair of lines, the darker of the pair is the June data, and the lighter is the December data. The dotted blue line is the reverse (north/south) of the light blue line, and is shown in order to highlight the difference in reflected solar near the poles.

OK, so here we finally can see why the shape of the reflected solar data is so wonky. In December, there is much more solar reflection from the Antarctic region, with its very high albedo. December reflections at 70°S are about 500 TW/°. On the other hand, in June at 70°N the reflections are much smaller, only about 350 TW/°. As a result, when these regions swing into and out of view of the sun, we get large differences in reflected sunlight.

But the real surprise for me in Figure 6 was the upwelling longwave. The downwelling and reflected solar profiles are quite different from June to December … but to my shock, the upwelling longwave hardly changes at all. Say what? Heck, in the extra-tropical southern hemisphere there’s almost no difference at all in longwave radiation over the year … why so little change in either hemisphere?

And that, to me is the joy of science—not knowing which bush hides the rabbit … or the tiger.

Finally, Figure 7 shows the TOA net radiation imbalance. This is the downwelling solar energy, less what is reflected, less what is radiated.

top of atmosphere toa imbalance ceres global actual loess

Figure 7. Net top-of-atmosphere (TOA) radiation imbalance. Note that this is an anomaly, because there is a known error of about a 5 W/m2 difference in the incoming and outgoing CERES radiation data. So while we can use it for trends and standard deviations, it cannot tell us if there is an overall persistent imbalance in the TOA radiation. Positive values show the system gaining energy, and negative values show it losing energy. Panels as in previous figures, showing the data (top panel) along with the seasonal and residual components of the signal.

I see that this has the reverse of the four-month rise, eight-month fall pattern of the reflected data. The TOA imbalance falls for four months, and then rises for eight months.

Once again, however, the most surprising aspect of this net imbalance data is the amazing stability. There is no trend in the data, and the standard deviation of the residuals is only a bit above about half a watt per square metre.

Remember that this is a system that is moving huge, unimaginable amounts of energy, with average downwelling total surface radiation of half a kilowatt, and peak surface solar insolation of about a kilowatt. More importantly, it is a system with the significant albedo variables being nothing more solid than the ephemeral, seasonal, mutable phenomena of clouds, wind, snow, ice, and vegetation.

In such a system, it is something eminently worthy of study that over the thirteen years of the CERES dataset, for reflected solar and upwelling longwave, 95% of the months are within one watt/m2 of the seasonal average. Within one lousy watt! We assuredly do not know all the reasons why that might be so …

Anyhow, thanks for coming along. Looks like the weather forecast for the voyage was about right. 

All the best to each of you,

w.

Standard Proclaimer: If you disagree with something that I or anyone has said, please QUOTE THE EXACT WORDS that you disagree with. Only then can we understand what it is you object to.

[UPDATE]:

DATA AND CODE: The code is in a zipped folder here. Unzip it and put the individual files into the workspace. You’ll also need the CERES TOA data in the same workspace (WARNNG: 230 Mbytes). The main file is called “Three Clocks.R”, I think it’s all turnkey.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

99 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Konrad
March 9, 2014 8:16 pm

Willis,
I have a question. (good news, it’s not related to “crazy” experiments 😉
Figure five shows a peak in surface albedo and reflected solar SW at the ITCZ, just where the cloud thermostat hypothesis says there should be a peak. However the up-welling LWIR trace also shows a corresponding dip. This is not what I would have expected.
Standard NASA energy budgets show 90% of absorbed energy leaving the planet as OLR from the atmosphere. This is typically a slow process, with full circulation in tropospheric cells taking weeks. I would have expected the up-welling LWIR curve to have been smoother.
Is up-welling LWIR directly measured by CERES satellites or is it inferred by subtracting reflected SW from incoming TSI?

James Smyth
March 9, 2014 10:23 pm

because there is a known difference of 5 W/m2 between the totals of the incoming and outgoing radiation … so the CERES data can’t help us determine if the earth is gaining or losing energy.
I don’t understand this. If the difference is known, why can’t we determine the gain/loss?

March 9, 2014 10:49 pm

“but to my shock, the upwelling longwave hardly changes at all. Say what? Heck, in the extra-tropical southern hemisphere there’s almost no difference at all in longwave radiation over the year … why so little change in either hemisphere?”
I submit that the reason is most upwelling longwave comes from the oceans, and more so in the southern hemisphere, as a part of a subcycle between the surface and the atmosphere with an energy budget equal to TSI. The photon food fight basically is its own sun, and the other one can go where it will between the tropics.

March 9, 2014 10:54 pm

“its own sun” (as long as daddy keeps paying the bills)

Dr. Strangelove
March 9, 2014 11:51 pm

Willis,
Your observed different seasonality of solar radiation, reflected solar and outgoing longwave is no mystery. It is expected.
Solar radiation peaks in January because of earth’s perihelion is on January 3. Reflected solar peaks in December because winter in the Northern Hemisphere starts on December 21. More snow coverage in North America, Russia, Europe and more Arctic sea ice coverage. Snow and ice reflect solar radiation. It’s summer in Antarctica but the ice sheet doesn’t melt because the temperature is negative 3 C.
Outgoing longwave IR peaks in July because of dry season in the tropics, which peaks in July at the equator. Tropics is warmer than Northern and Southern Hemispheres. It gives emits more longwave IR and dry season is warmer than wet season.

Dr. Strangelove
March 10, 2014 12:10 am

Willis,
BTW winter in NH and Arctic sea ice peak in February but Antarctic sea ice bottoms in February. While in December there’s already snow coverage in NH and Antarctic sea ice coverage is still high. Overall NH plus SH, there’s more snow and ice in December than February.

Konrad
March 10, 2014 12:32 am

Willis Eschenbach says:
March 9, 2014 at 10:34 pm
————————————
Willis,
Thank you for the chart.
When I “spin” that planetary map averaging along lines of latitude, a distinct band over the ITCZ appears –
http://i61.tinypic.com/20zcner.jpg
However from the original chart, it appears geographical patterns are having a strong influence in this region.
More questions as you say.

Dr. Strangelove
March 10, 2014 2:16 am

Willis
I followed your mistake blindly. Yes longwave peaks not in July but in March-April and October-September. These are the months when northern and southern tropics are both in dry season. July is peak at the equator. But north and south of the equator have larger area than the equator itself.
Sorry for my carelessness since I looked at the charts in just a few minutes.

Nylo
March 10, 2014 3:17 am

Willis Eschenbach says:
March 9, 2014 at 1:05 pm
Most folks think the variations in CO2 are mostly from NH biosphere variations, not sure where you got the idea it’s temperature variations.
When I first did that analysis some years ago (the no-change in the CO2 reduction between May and October whereas October-May increase has changed a lot), I showed it in some alarmist site, which I cannot remember now but was probably Real Climate, in a comment to a related post. My claim that it was probably the biosphere absorbing more CO2 than before was replied back saying that I was wrong, that the biosphere does indeed absorb more CO2 in those months than the rest of the year, but that the bulk of the reduction came from the cooling of the Southern Oceans and the CO2 uptake that comes with it. Which, to me, makes no sense, because if the SO were starting to uptake more CO2 than in the past, we would see the effect all the year. But I let it die at the time.
Willis Eschenbach says:
March 9, 2014 at 1:05 pm
I don’t see that the plants are “sequestering it also a lot more”. Total global sequestration has undoubtedly increased, but plant sequestration (annual decrease in CO2) has stayed about the same.
I don’t follow you here. If annual decrease in CO2 during May-October stays about the same, but we are emitting more than before in those months, then necesarily “something” is absorbing more to counter our increased emissions during those months. And this something only works between the months of May and October, as we don’t observe the same countering of the effect the rest of the year. This “something” may not be the NH plants… but then what else could it be, that would only increase the CO2 uptake during those months and not during the rest of the year?

ssat
March 10, 2014 4:48 am

Willis, my apologies, in my post at March 9, 2014 at 7:51 am I did not put the intended question mark at the end. With that, you will see that I wonder about the calibration adjustment that has been made to bring the TOA imbalance into the realms of believability. It is the absence of a trend that is bothering me. If there was an increasing imbalance then we could conclude that this was to be expected if increasing CO2 was cause. If there was a decreasing trend then that would suggest that it is not. Between those two lies the possibility that increasing CO2 has a neutral effect. If that is the case then perhaps the calibration adjustment should be one that centres the ‘imbalance’ at zero?
I then go on to extrapolate perhaps a step too far, but hey, I’m a sceptic.

aaron
March 10, 2014 5:35 am

“Southern Oceans and the CO2 uptake that comes with it. Which, to me, makes no sense, because if the SO were starting to uptake more CO2 than in the past, we would see the effect all the year. But I let it die at the time.”
The intake is constant, but may vary by component. The output is what is trending. The two most likely sinks are bio and ocean (and ocean bio). Do we have good numbers on ocean emissions? My guess would be that with the extra CO2 in the atmosphere, the atmoshpere is already close to equalibrium so the ocean emits less during that phase of the CO2 cycle to reach equalibrium.

eyesonu
March 10, 2014 9:06 am

Konrad says:
March 10, 2014 at 12:32 am
Willis Eschenbach says:
March 9, 2014 at 10:34 pm
————————————
Willis,
Thank you for the chart.
When I “spin” that planetary map averaging along lines of latitude, a distinct band over the ITCZ appears –
http://i61.tinypic.com/20zcner.jpg
However from the original chart, it appears geographical patterns are having a strong influence in this region.
More questions as you say.
===============
With reference to both comments above and related links by Willlis and Konrad above and also mine March 8, 2014 at 11:37 pm.
Is there a lot of reflection from the Sahara region and is there a lot of reflection from cloud formation in the areas of the downwind regions of all those islands in SE Asia (Malaysia, Indonesia, etc) and would the Pacific trade winds pushing warm water into/through these islands set up a localized (from a global view point) effect along the 5N to 10N band? I don’t know much about the geography of those Islands but high mountains/elevation could lead to cloud formation on the lee sides. Multiply by a few thousand miles and it could be substantial.
It may be neat to break that narrow band apart to see what effect is involved here. I would venture to suggest that land geography along this band plays and important role in the questions I had (in my mind) while observing Fig 6 in the head post.
Questions, questions, questions!

eyesonu
March 10, 2014 9:52 am

Further to my comment above, not to be overlooked but not included in my comment would also include Willis’ emergent phenomena. Is there a lack of or lesser extent of ocean currents in/around the northern and western Indian ocean ( that would help flush out warmer waters) which would allow the surface temps to increase that would trigger the earth thermostat in this region that would cause higher cloud reflection that shows up in Fig 6 ? Northwest Indian ocean water looks like it could be in a “trap” in a sense.
These presentations by Willis cause me happy anguish. That anguish being that now I have to divert much time and thought from more pressing issues to my brains “need to know”. It’s a happy anguish indeed.

1sky1
March 10, 2014 4:12 pm

Roy Clark says:
March 9, 2014 at 1:25 am
“There is no climate ‘equlibrium’, just a lot of heating and cooling of large thermal reservoirs.”
Spot on, Roy! Getting people to recognize that–along with the dominant role of evaporation in transfering heat to the atmosphere–is a real challenge. Nothing interferes with comprehension of real-world surface climate variations more than the simplistic “radiative greenhouse” paradigm.

Dr. Strangelove
March 11, 2014 8:31 pm

Willis,
I developed the equations to determine TOA reflected solar radiation as a function of snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere and Arctic and Antarctic sea ice coverage.
Albedo of sea ice at surface is 0.7 convert this to albedo at TOA
(0.7 x 200 + 77) / 340 W/m^2 = 0.64
Albedo of snow at surface = 0.9 convert to albedo at TOA
(0.9 x 200 + 77) / 340 W/m^2 = 0.76
TOA reflected solar radiation is determined by solving these equations
R = S/A (a1 As + a2 Ai + a3 An)
An = A – As – Ai
Where: R = TOA reflected solar radiation, S = TOA solar radiation, A = earth surface area = 510 million km^2, As = Northern Hemisphere snow cover, Ai = Arctic and Antarctic sea ice cover, An = area not covered by NH snow and sea ice, a1 = albedo of snow = 0.76, a2 = albedo of sea ice = 0.64, a3 = albedo without NH snow and sea ice = 0.26
At minimum R in September
S = 330 W/m^2
Ai = 22 million km^2
As = 6 million km^2
Solving the equations, R = 93 W/m^2
At maximum R in December
S = 350 W/m^2
Ai = 23 million km^2
As = 35 million km^2
Solving the equations, R = 109 W/m^2
The results are consistent with CERES data in Figure 3

Dr. Strangelove
March 12, 2014 8:20 pm

Willis
I developed this equation to determine TOA longwave radiation as a function of seasonal temperature in Northern and Southern Hemispheres (including the tropics)
L = e o (Tn^4 + Ts^4)/2
Where: L = TOA longwave radiation, e = effective TOA emissivity = 0.631, o = Stefan-Boltzmann constant, Tn = ave. temperature in Northern Hemisphere, Ts = ave. temperature in Southern Hemisphere
At maximum L in September
Tn = 291 K
Ts = 283.5 K
Solving the equation, L = 244 W/m^2
At minimum L in December
Tn = 282 K
Ts = 288 K
Solving the equation, L = 236 W/m^2
The results match CERES data in Figure 4

Brian H
March 23, 2014 1:22 am

Where are the horizontal dashed gold lines? Noseeum.