The North Atlantic Seesaw

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach

In my peripatetic meandering through the CERES satellite data, I’ve been looking at the correlation between the temperatures in the NINO3.4 region and the temperatures of the rest of the planet.

The NINO3.4 region is an area in the equatorial eastern Pacific Ocean. It covers five degrees north and south of the Equator, from 170° West to 120° West. Temperatures in that area are used to measure the strength of the El Nino / La Nina phenomenon.

Now, people often discuss procedures like “removing the effects of the El Nino from the global temperature record”. What they mean is that they have noted the similarity between the temperature of the NINO3.4 region and the global temperature. Figure 1 shows that relationship as seen in the CERES data.

Global and enso34 surface temps

Figure 1. Surface temperature of the globe (blue) and of the central Pacific ENSO3.4 area (red). Note the large “El Nino” event at the end of 2015. Both datasets are normalized (set to a mean of zero and a standard deviation of one).

Seeing this relationship, people have “removed” the NINO3.4 temperature variations from the temperature record. They have done this by subtracting out, in one form or another, the variations that are “caused” by the El Nino swings. However, I have disagreed numerous times with this procedure. Let me propose a more encompassing way to understand the relationship shown in Figure 1.

This is to note that although there are areas of the surface which show a good positive correlation to global temperatures, there are also areas that show a good negative correlation to global temperatures. Figure 2 shows this relationship on a gridcell by gridcell basis. It displays how well the temperatures in each gridcell agree or disagree with the global average temperature variations shown in Figure 1.

correlation 0 month lag global and gridcell temps

Figure 2. Correlation of each gridcell with the global average temperature. Note the large areas of negative correlation (green and blue)

Looking at that, I ask you to reconsider the idea that we can simply subtract out the temperature variations in the NINO3.4 area (blue box) from the global temperature … clearly, the relationships are far from simple. Is the fact that certain areas correlate well with the global variations a sufficient reason to “remove” them from the temperature record?

And if so, why limit ourselves to the ENSO3.4 area of the Pacific? Why not use a much larger area of the Pacific and “remove” half of the Pacific from the temperature record?

Setting those questions aside, the overall pattern in the Pacific is clearly related to the heat which is moved by the El Nino / La Nina pump. These two phenomena act together to pump warm Equatorial water across the Pacific in a westward direction. Once this warm surface water hits the Asian mainland/islands it splits and moves toward the two poles.

Now, many people say that this shows that the El Nino / La Nina is causing the global temperature changes. I say that the causation is going the other way. When the earth warms and excess heat accumulates in the eastern tropical Pacific, it triggers a cycle of the El Nino / La Nina pump. This pump moves warm water to the poles, where it is lost to space. Overall this cools the planet. The results of this pumping action can be seen in Figure 2 as the green areas in the western Pacific heading towards the north and south polar regions.

In other words, the El Nino doesn’t control the temperature—the temperature controls the El Nino.

We can look at this from another perspective. Rather than comparing gridcells to the average global surface temperature as in Figure 2, we can compare gridcells to the average NINO3.4 area temperature. Figure 3 shows that result.

correlation 0 month lag enso and gridcell temps 2Figure 3. As in Figure 2, but comparing ENSO3.4 area temperatures with gridcell temperatures. Note different color scale than that used in Figure 2.

Again, a most interesting result. It makes the El Nino pattern even clearer. Note that both the Western Pacific and the North Atlantic move in opposition to the NINO3.4 area.

The source of the pattern seen in Figure 3 is clear. It is driven by the El Nino / La Nina pump. When enough heat has accumulated in the eastern Pacific, the El Nino / La Nina pump pushes warm water first westward, then poleward. This cools the eastern Pacific and warms the western Pacific. In the South Pacific, you can see how it goes around Cape Horn at the south end of South America.

The oddity from my perspective is the North Atlantic. It moves in opposition to the NINO3.4 area, but the physical nature of the connection (or teleconnection) between the two is not clear to me.

In any case, I wanted to look at how temperatures in the areas in blue changed with respect to changes in the NINO3.4 temperatures. I restricted the analysis to the areas with a correlation more negative than – 0.3. Those areas are outlined in Figure 4 below. It is the same as Figure 3, but with the most negative areas outlined by the gray contour lines.

correlation 0 month lag enso and gridcell temps

Figure 4. As in Figure 3, but with the gray contour line at a correlation of – 0.3.

Note that the North Atlantic is included among the areas with a strong negative correlation to the NINO3.4 area. To see the difference between the positively and negatively correlated areas shown in Figure 4, I graphed them up in Figure 5.

temperature anomaly enso 34 and minus correlation

Figure 5. This shows the two areas outlined in Figure 4 above. The red line shows the average of the NINO3.4 area, shown as a rectangle in Figure 4. The blue line shows the average of the areas shown in blue and outlined with a gray contour line.

Dang … I certainly didn’t expect that nearly perfect mirror-image. When the NINO3.4 area warms up the North Atlantic and the other areas cool down, and vice versa.

So this highlights the problem. Given that we have an alternating phenomenon wherein the North Atlantic cools down when the Eastern Pacific warms up, and vice versa … just exactly how should we “remove” this phenomenon from the global record?

And more to the point, why should we remove it? The El Nino / La Nina pump is a central part of the natural thermoregulatory mechanisms that keep the temperatures within a very narrow range (e.g. ± 0.3°C during the 20th Century). The Nino pump kicks into gear whenever excess heat accumulates in the equatorial Pacific waters and moves that warm water to the poles.

As such, “removing” the El Nino / La Nina / North Atlantic signal from the global signal is cutting out a vital emergent climate heat-removing mechanism … I don’t even have a name for what remains once that radical surgery is performed.

=================

Here, I’m putting the finish touches on this post and getting some needed hydration before going back to my current fun … driving a 1.5 tonne excavator, leveling an area on our tilted patch of dirt in order to make a level patio garden … big boys do love our big toys.

excavator

A summer’s day, an excavator, and red-tailed hawks circling in the distance … what’s not to like?

Best to all,

w.

PS: If you comment please QUOTE THE EXACT WORDS THAT YOU ARE DISCUSSING, so we can all be clear about your subject.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

250 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Frank
June 25, 2017 3:42 pm

Willis wrote: “And more to the point, why should we remove it? The El Nino / La Nina pump is a central part of the natural thermoregulatory mechanisms that keep the temperatures within a very narrow range (e.g. ± 0.3°C during the 20th Century). The Nino pump kicks into gear whenever excess heat accumulates in the equatorial Pacific waters and moves that warm water to the poles.”
If the ENSO “pump” moves warm surface water from one location on the surface to another, then it has nothing to do with the thermoregulatory mechanisms that control our temperature. The only way to get rid of heat is to radiate it to space, mostly from the upper troposphere. Does CERES show an increase in net inward radiation during the warming phase of the recent El Nino and a decrease as the temperature fell? If not, then ENSO is about variation in where heat is located within the climate system (internal or “unforced” variability), not about long-term regulation of our planet’s temperature. Temperature change forced by a change in the radiative balance across the TOA should NOT be removed from the temperature record, but internal variability can be.
Figure 3 clearly should that unusually high (or low) temperatures near the Nino3.4 region are associated – with no lag – with unusually low (or high) temperatures elsewhere elsewhere in the Pacific. This is consistent with the idea that warming is associated a change is heat flux on the surface. Looking for lagged relationships may help demonstrate where unusual heat is transported to. However, when planet surface AS A WHOLE is up to 0.5 K cooler after an El Nino ends and La Nina starts – and if this is not due to increased radiative cooling to space – then heat transfer between the surface and deeper ocean must be involved. In the absence of an El Nino, the Eastern Pacific is cooled by the upwelling of cold water off of South America, and winds normally carry that cold water across the Pacific as it is gradually warmed by the sun, to the Western Pacific where it is buried by downwelling. (Some of the normal westward flow occurs on the surface, beginning with surface flow towards the equator in the East and away from the equator in the West. That is why some places in the Western Pacific are cold when the Eastern Pacific is warm. However, movement on the surface can’t change the MGST: Only changes in vertical flux can change surface temperature. Those vertical changes can be changes in radiation (changed OLR or reflected SWR) or in upwelling and downwelling

Editor
June 25, 2017 6:22 pm

“Now, many people say that this shows that the El Nino / La Nina is causing the global temperature changes. I say that the causation is going the other way.”.
Yes.

Greg goodman
Reply to  afonzarelli
June 26, 2017 12:31 am

Importantly, the change shows up in global average ocean computations, based upon ocean temperature data (see our Fig. 3, here); this means that the changes centered in the Pacific are not offset by changes of the opposite sign occurring in other ocean basins.

This recognises the anti-correlation Willis points out.

afonzarelli
Reply to  afonzarelli
June 26, 2017 3:55 pm

“…during El Nino, there is an average decrease in the vertical overturning and mixing of cold, deep ocean waters with solar-heated warm surface waters. The result is that the surface waters become warmer than average, and deeper waters become colder than average.”

afonzarelli
Reply to  afonzarelli
June 26, 2017 4:08 pm

“In a sense, the deep ocean provides an air conditioner for the climate system, and during El Nino the air conditioner isn’t working as hard to cool the atmosphere.”

afonzarelli
Reply to  afonzarelli
June 26, 2017 4:51 pm

“Since the atmosphere responds to surface heating, anomolous warmth in the upper ocean layers gradually heats the atmosphere, mainly through increased precipitation heating in response to large rates of evaporation from the warm surface waters.”

Frank
Reply to  afonzarelli
June 27, 2017 12:01 pm

afonzarelli: If ENSO is due to changes in heat transport within the ocean – as Roy suggests – and not to changes in radiative imbalance at the TOA, then ENSO is internal variability within the climate system that produces short-term fluctuations. It is therefore perfectly sensible to remove the ENSO signal from temperature records to clearly see the long-term change produced at the TOA by rising GHGs – a change that is being obscured by these fluctuations.
However, Roy raises the complication ENSO is also associated with a change in albedo. Albedo is part of the radiative imbalance (forcing) at the TOA.

Frederik Michiels
June 25, 2017 9:31 pm

Willis,
in general you are right if you use the real time response as you did.
but bob tisdale did show how it works: the indian and atlantic ocean does “follow” the el nino with a lagged response of around 3 months…
The el nino is a bit more complex then that… what you show is it’s “loading pattern”, which is well known (and that’s where you are correct)

Bob Weber
June 26, 2017 12:00 pm

In response to prior comments above
“But those [TSI] changes are so minuscule and so short-lived [less than 1/1000 of what we get from the Sun every day] as to have no measurable effect on the climate.”
“That is what caused a 0.05 degree variation [0.9/1361/4*288] of global temperature over the solar cycle [from 2008 to 2015]”
Note this is a THEORY that these small TSI changes matter so little according to one formula. Where is the real world test for such claims? My solar theory formulas and models are real-world tested.
The sun provided all the energy for the great 2008-2016 SST spike, all 0.6C.
“Note that it is possible that SORCE TIM has a calibration problem [see the other link]. We are looking into that at the moment. The problem is not important for the overall explanation”
I noticed 2 years ago the variation in the correlation of SORCE TSI to F10.7cm over time and account for it in my 90-day model. The problem was not important for the overall explanation of my works either.
***
“‘The magnetic flux that decayed from the sunspot peak in 2014 flowed to the poles and by early 2015 provided the maximum magnetic potential for TSI.’
No, we do not mean the same thing. The polar fields are not controlling TSI and have nothing to do with TSI.”
Yes we do mean the same thing except you haven’t acknowledged the data I presented nor its meaning.
It is a matter of solar data and observational fact that the sunspot number peak in every solar cycle generates the maximum plasma flow to the pole, observable in the image below, flow that generates the maximum TSI when the plasma reaches the pole. It’s in the data. All you have to do is go through the solar data to discover a basic temporal relationship: TSI peaks after SSNs and F10.7 peak. It has to do with sunspot decay and plasma flow time. The 2014 sunspot peak created the 2015 TSI peak.
http://wso.stanford.edu/gifs/all.gif
I did not specifically claim what you said. I did not say “The polar fields are controlling TSI” – I said the cycle TSI peak happens at the time when the SSN peak plasma gets to the pole”, a fine distinction. The whole sun electromagnetic field, TSI, is at it’s max right at that time. It’s in the data. You can’t credibly say the process has nothing to do with TSI. It has everything to do with TSI.

Reply to  Bob Weber
June 26, 2017 12:30 pm

Note this is a THEORY that these small TSI changes matter so little according to one formula
According to a well-established physical law https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hJx2Kjtz0U
I said the cycle TSI peak happens at the time when the SSN peak plasma gets to the pole”, a fine distinction. The whole sun electromagnetic field, TSI, is at it’s max right at that time. It’s in the data. You can’t credibly say the process has nothing to do with TSI. It has everything to do with TSI.
What you are trying to say is that TSI is maximum at solar maximum. The polar fields also reverse at that time, but this is just a timing thing, not a cause. The plasma flow has nothing to do with this. The typical time for the flow to go from the sunspot zones to the polar region is about two years and it takes several such consecutive surges of magnetic flux to reverse the polar fields. But again, nothing to do with TSI. Here you can see the latest reversal: http://jsoc.stanford.edu/data/hmi/polarfield/
electromagnetic field, TSI,
TSI is not the ‘electromagnetic field’ of the sun, but the energy flux. Here is what an electromagnetic field is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_field

June 26, 2017 3:00 pm

Other ways to “smooth out the ENSO” cycles from the global temps are possible, rather than simply subtracting off a weighted ENSO index, like NINO 3.4, as Santer et al (2014) did.
In sea-level work, sometimes analyses are done using just tide gauges from locations where vertical land motion is thought to be very low, e.g., Jerry Mitrovica’s list of 23 (or view thumbnails), or Simon Holgate’s list of nine (or view thumbnails).
Analogously, you could make an ocean temperature index which simply excludes the orange and blue regions in Willis’s map.
Alternately, for sea-level work you could smooth out the strong effect of ENSO on some Pacific tide gauges by calculating a weighted average which includes gauges at both the eastern and western sides of the ocean, which see opposite effects on sea-level from ENSO as the Pacific “sloshes” back and forth. That would cause the opposite-sign ENSO effects cancel in your average. For example, a weighted sea-level average of about 55% San Diego plus 45% Kwajalein should exhibit very little ENSO signal, even though both locations are strongly affected (in opposite directions) by ENSO. (Note: I’m just guessing at the percentages, I haven’t calculated them.)
http://www.sealevel.info/1820000_Kwajalein_San_Diego_2016-04_vs_ENSO.png
Analogously, one could weight different areas of the oceans differently in a “global average” ocean SST index, giving a bit more weight to the ocean regions which are negatively correlated with ENSO, and a bit less to the ocean regions positively correlated portions, until the ENSO signal disappears in the “average.”
One possible refinement: For temperatures, you might be able to do even better at erasing the ENSO signal by applying a modest time-shift to some regions, before calculating your average, to account for delays in the ENSO signal. (For sea-level, that’s not necessary, because when the incompressible water “sloshes up” in one place, it “sloshes down” in another, simultaneously.)

June 27, 2017 4:25 pm

Willis, there is a problem with your interpretation Nino3.4 and El Nino. If you look at either of your two maps you can’t help noticing that this is the warmest body of water anywhere on earth. How did it get that way? There is no sign of how it was done in the graphs. Fact is that we are looking at one phase of the El Nino formation that did not begin in the Central Pacific Ocean. I am fairly sure you did not read my book so let me put it together for you. The source of this very warm water is the Indo-Pacific Warm Pool, which it emptied because it now looks blue on your chart. But the real beginning of an El Nino event is further back and begins with the trade winds. They blow from east to west and drive warm Pacific waters up into a bulge we call the Indo-Pacific Warm Pool. Eventually the trades reach a limit of how much water can be pushed up and gravity flow in reverse begins. It goes down along the equatorial counter-current that starts at the warm pool, crosses the ocean along the equator, and hits South America, There it splits north and south parallel to the coast. Its warm water now spreads out, warms the air above, warm air rises, joins the westerlies, and we notice that an El Nino has arrived. This happens mainly along the California coast because the Andes block the westerlies in South America. But any water that runs ashore must also retreat. As the El Nino wave retreats water level in its wake goes down as much as half a meter. Cold water from below will then fill that vacuum and a La Nina gets started. This is a dynamic situation and can be followed because of constantly occurring temperature changes. The Nino3.4 maximum happens wqhen the batch of warm water from the Ind0-Pacific Warm Pool has reached the Mid-Pacific. There is a time delay after this until it has reached far enough along the coast and sent up the warm air we take take to be the arrival of the El Nino. What happens next? The warm air gets carried across the US, Mexico and the Atlantic ocean and then gets registered in Europe with a time delay. . It continues further eastward and is detectable also in Japan with an additional time delay, required for the westerlies to get there. The US, Mexican, European, and Japanese records of global temperature trace out the same ENSO oscillation of which the first memnber is the Nino3.4 we picked up in the Central Pacific. This keeps repeating but the frequency may be variable. BEST once showed these parallel ENSO waves recorded by different national observatories. Going back to the La Nina we saw starting, when it crosses the Pacific it is followed quickly by the next El Nino that the trade winds have been building up up to follow the same path its predecessor did. From figure 15 in my book I judge the average ENSO period , the space between two peaks, to be about four years but it can be changed by other things happening in the ocean. Many dynamic aspects of this systems have not been properly studied. The westerlies that carry it all over the world, for example, are a blanket of contiguous and parallel El Nino waves, And something else occurs to me that is not well studied – the30 degree temperature maximum for the oceans. I think that getting those Argo measurements out to prove it is deserving of name recognition for you.

Reply to  Arno Arrak (@ArnoArrak)
June 27, 2017 7:23 pm

Arno Arrak wrote, “And something else occurs to me that is not well studied – the30 degree temperature maximum for the oceans.”
I’m impressed by your very in-depth knowledge about ENSO, Arno.
But the topic of the apparent “thermostat” limiting ocean temperatures has been studied by Willis, and before him by Lindzen, and before him by Ramanathan & Collins.
Willis wrote about it two years ago, here on WUWT. It is a particularly wonderful piece of work:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/06/03/albedic-meanderings/
I’m less well acquainted with Lindzen’s work; for info see:
http://www-eaps.mit.edu/faculty/lindzen/adinfriris.pdf
https://judithcurry.com/2015/05/26/modeling-lindzens-adaptive-infrared-iris/
For Ramanathan & Collins see:
http://lightning.sbs.ohio-state.edu/geog5921/paper_thermostat_Ramanathan1991.pdf
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v358/n6385/pdf/358394a0.pdf
For the sake of balance, here are links to SkS’s arguments against such a mechanism:
https://skepticalscience.com/infrared-iris-effect-negative-feedback.htm
https://skepticalscience.com/tropical-terhmostat-limits-sea-surface-temperature-to-30C.htm
(Beware: I do not consider SkS a reliable source.)