Sentences with phrase «net ocean heat»

Instead of ignoring this baiting (like I probably should continue doing), I will repeat for you what is believed about how CO2 functions like a blanket and determines the net ocean heat differences.

The slight drop in net ocean heat from 2003 - 2005 fits what the Astrophysicists predicted some years ago.

What the ice actually does in a particular year depends upon the «forcings» (to misapply a term, perhaps) actually occurring — net ocean heat fluxes, net radiative fluxes, winds and currents (especially, but not exclusively, as they determine ice export to the North Atlantic.)

Net Ocean heating 90 Net Ice cap, ice sheet, and glacier melt 4 - 6 Net Soils heating 2 Atmosphere heat buildup 1

Not exact matches

ocean system is associated with an amplified increase in arctic surface air temperature, downward longwave radiation, and net heat flux.

Figure 4 - Comparison of net TOA flux and upper - ocean heating rates.

«The rise and fall in CERES and ERA - Interim net radiation and upper - ocean heating rates after 2007 (Figs 2 and 4) is entirely consistent with variability linked to ENSO (Fig. 3) and shows no evidence of a discrepancy between TOA net radiation and energy accumulating in Earth's climate system»

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00148.1 Global satellite observations show the sea surface temperature (SST) increasing since the 1970s in all ocean basins, while the net air — sea heat flux Q decreases.

a, Global annual average (July to June) net TOA flux from CERES observations and 0 — 700 and 0 — 1,800 m ocean heating rates from PMEL / JPL / JIMAR.

Smaller contributions to planetary energy imbalance are from heat gain by the deeper ocean (+0.10 W / m2), energy used in net melting of ice (+0.05 W / m2), and energy taken up by warming continents (+0.02 W / m2).

The ice melting from ocean heat flux decreases faster than the ice growth does in the weakly stratified Southern Ocean, leading to an increase in the net ice production and hence an increase in ice mass.&rocean heat flux decreases faster than the ice growth does in the weakly stratified Southern Ocean, leading to an increase in the net ice production and hence an increase in ice mass.&rOcean, leading to an increase in the net ice production and hence an increase in ice mass.»

Suppression of ocean circulation overturning decreases the ocean heat flux available to melt ice, leading to an increase in net ice production [13].

Ocean Plaza has its own heated pool and children's pool, spa, vibrasauna, two golf practice nets, tennis courts and gym.

An apparent inconsistency has been diagnosed between interannual variations in the net radiation imbalance inferred from satellite measurements and upper - ocean heating rate from in situ measurements, and this inconsistency has been interpreted as «missing energy» in the system2.

You also need to think about the net heat flux into the ocean (but that is less constrained).

[Response: Not an absurd question, but in practice net geothermal heating (including volcanoes, mid ocean ridges etc) is about 0.075 W / m2 — some 20 times less important than human CO2 increases.

That makes it look like 2010 was characterized by a slight departure from the average net transfers of heat between ocean and surface.

In neither case, however, does the direction of heat flow change; heat is still (net) flowing into the oceans from the atmosphere, only the rate changes.

If Victor wasn't so stupid & trollish I would suggest Rob Painting's «How Increasing Carbon Dioxide Heats The Ocean» over on SkS and, by way of preparation, the added quote from IPCC AR5 WG1 3.4.1 «The net air — sea heat flux is the sum of two turbulent (latent and sensible) and two radiative (shortwave and longwave) components.»

The 2 Gton / yr net CO2 invasion into the ocean is driven by the rising atmospheric concentration, not by water flow or heat fluxes or anything like that.

3) Can you confirm that the temperature and net flux data for GISS - E2 - R, available via the CMIP5 portals and KNMI Climate Explorer are based on a model corrected to fix the ocean heat transport problem which you identified in the Russel ocean model in your 2014 paper?

In these experiments the climate sensitivity was 2.7 deg C for a doubling of CO2, the net aerosol forcing from 1940 to 2000 was around -0.7 W / m2 (55 % of the total forcing, -1.27, from 1850 to 2000), and the ocean uptake of heat was well - matched to recent observations.

then would increase the heat flow atmosphere - > ocean, leading to lower (dynamic) equilibrium temperature in the atmosphere which of course occurs very fast, as the thermal mass of the atmosphere is very low compared to the net energy throughput.

# 192 «For example a strengthening of wind over some oceanic region http://web.science.unsw.edu.au/~matthew/nclimate2106-incl-SI.pdf then would increase the heat flow atmosphere - > ocean, leading to lower (dynamic) equilibrium temperature in the atmosphere which of course occurs very fast, as the thermal mass of the atmosphere is very low compared to the net energy throughput.»

That leads to a net heat flux into the surface ocean where it anomalously heats the mixed layer (and circulation slowly diffuses and advects that heat into the deeper ocean).

The warming of the world ocean is associated with an increase in global surface air temperature, downward longwave radiation, and therefore net heat flux.

Looking at the surface temperature and the ocean heat content changes together though allows us to pin down the total unrealised forcing (the net radiation imbalance) and demonstrate that the models are consistent with both the surface and ocean changes.

The change in radiation balance is more heating of the oceans at one side (specifically high in the subtropics, as expected), but more heat released at higher altitudes, thus somewhere acting as a net negative feedback to higher sea surface temperatures.

[Response: In a stable climate the net heat into the ocean would be zero.

ocean system is associated with an amplified increase in arctic surface air temperature, downward longwave radiation, and net heat flux.

It was said above that the ocean is warming just like the land (& air and ice sheets / glaciers), that the heat in the ocean dwarfs that in the land and air, that the warming is due to the net solar imbalance (solar in, less LW out - no mention of CO2.)

If we isolate the ocean for diagnosis, there is a rather short list of suspect forcings and feedbacks (ie changes in shortwave reaching ocean surface possibly from strong negative aerosol feedbacks, net positive rate change in loss of longwave from the ocean (which would have implications for the positive WVF), net positive heat loss through evaporation without balancing compensation (with other implications for positive WVF).

Even with these possible issues, it buys us 50 years of economic growth and technological development and a net reduction in the heat content of the ocean, that the future warming must overcome.

Re # 36: «This incoming shortwave is balanced by * net * ocean heat loss through back radiation (41 %)» The key word * net * should have been used.

There's an ocean net heat flux of 3.8 T Watt through the Fram Strait (between Iceland and Greenland) with 2.3 T Watt through the Bering Strait, both into the Arctic.

For example: 1) plants giving off net CO2 in hot conditions (r / t aborbing)-- see: http://www.climateark.org/articles/reader.asp?linkid=46488 2) plants dying out due to heat & drought & wild fires enhanced by GW (reducing or cutting short their uptake of CO2 & releasing CO2 in the process) 3) ocean methane clathrates melting, giving off methane 4) permafrost melting & giving off methane & CO2 5) ice & snow melting, uncovering dark surfaces that absorb more heat 6) the warming slowing the thermohaline ocean conveyor & its up - churning of nutrients — reducing marine plant life & that carbon sink.

The mixed layer of the ocean is mixed (pretty much by definition) thus the net fluxes at the surface (latent heat, sensible heat, long wave up and down, short wave down) warm or cool the whole layer.

I also tried to find an estimate of the net effect of hurricane activity on upper ocean heat content; there are some reports on individual hurricanes (http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/cyclone/data/pubs/Opal.pdf) but I couldn't find any global estimates.

Much of the radiation from the atmospheric gases, also in the infrared range, is transmitted back to the ocean, reducing the net long wave radiation heat loss of the ocean.

For example — unless there is a fundamentally different mechanism involved — the PDO and ENSO merely redistributes heat between oceans and atmosphere and there is no net effect on global warming or cooling at all.

Since ARGO has been in operation, the record shows a net heat loss of the upper ocean (which team leader, Josh Willis, has referred to scientifically as a «speed bump»).

Quite apart from the wider publicity given to the heat transport problem in the Russell ocean model (which affects all of the published GISS - E2 - R results), and the famous rogue LU run where a negative forcing yields an overall positive net flux response (which is not rogue at all and not to be excluded according to Gavin), the WMGHG results and particularly the relationship between Fi and ERF values now seem positively bizarre.

The variation of net global sensible and latent heat flux from the ocean, being impacted greatly by ENSO, the PDO, and the AMO, plays the dominant role in the fluctuations in total energy output measured at the TOA over short - term time frames.

Factors that resulted in a net cooling or a net effect close to zero aren't really relevant, nor are climate dynamics that affect the rate of warming as a function of ocean heat uptake, since that does not significantly affect the apportionment of warming among different factors.

By a very very big margin, the net flow of latent and sensible heat is from ocean to atmosphere on a global basis.

The estimate of increase in global ocean heat content for 1971 — 2010 quantified in Box 3.1 corresponds to an increase in mean net heat flux from the atmosphere to the ocean of 0.55 W m — 2.

Over that period, solar forcing was net negative, volcanic forcing was net negative, and oceanic fluctuations can not give the ocean heat, merely shift it around.

The most reliable source of information for changes in the global mean net air — sea heat flux comes from the constraints provided by analyses of changes in ocean heat storage.

You however are assuming (it seems to me) that because when you plot net flux against T, you don't get a straight line, that the explanation must be something to do with how fast or slow the ocean heat uptake is.

In contrast, closure of the global ocean mean net surface heat flux budget to within 20 W m — 2 from observation based surface flux data sets has still not been reliably achieved (e.g., Trenberth et al., 2009).