Sentences with phrase «ohc below»

Further, studies addressing global OHC below 2000m (reviewed in IPCC AR5 Section 3.2.4) find not a sign of net cooling of the size required by BNO (S).

Not exact matches

As for OHC, it is likely to be a combination of internal variability, not accounting for heat increases below 700m, and issues with the observing system — compare to the Lyman et al analysis.

But there are different ways to treat the OHC and we return to that below.

However because we don't measure ocean heat content below 2000m (about half of the total volume), the OHC you cite applies to the top half volume only, so the average dT in this part of volume is just under 0.1 K (0.08) consistent with the estimates.

If the surface temperature of the oceans was below normal from 1250 to 1400 AD until 1910, it just might take more than 100 years for the OHC to recover to «normal».

Nor its implications: that OHC rise is being driven from * above *, not below.

The thing is, the heat being lost from the 0 - 700m layer to below 700m and to the Indian Ocean from both the Pacific and Atlantic is not being replenished from above the surface in any way because 0 - 700m OHC is falling in both the Pacific and Atlantic.

As can be seen in the graph below the OHC is steadily rising.

But you suggested that the 1995/96 rise in Tropical Pacific OHC may have come from below the 700 meter level, when you wrote, «After all a slightly less cold upwelling entering the ENSO process from below would manifest itself in warming at the surface (and vice versa) and that would help to account for the apparent disjunction between the strengths of the La Nina and El Nino phases in your article.»

You can also rested assured that, back in September, when I first posted the NODC OHC data and noted the anomalous 1995/96 rise in Tropical Pacific OHC, I used another dataset that reaches well below the 700 meter level to verify it.

I showed that the height of the water column of the tropical Pacific reflected the same rise as the 1995/96 OHC, countering your inference that a pocket of warm water rose up from below the 700 meter depth in the tropical Pacific.

Figure 4, C and D, shows that the dominant OHC variability below 300 m occurs mainly in the Atlantic basin and the Antarctic Circumpolar Current (ACC) region.

More SW held below; upward influence on OHC.

I thought the idea was that an increase in the atmospheric radiative forcing from above would warm the skin layer a bit, reducing the temp gradient to the water layer below, thus impeding the transport of absorbed solar energy up and back out of the ocean, and thus making it pile up to increase OHC.

So, 100 % of the OHC variation in the ARGO period (for the full 0m - 2000m layer) still is a reflection of the average TOA imbalance over that period (modulo the latent heat of fusion lost to melting part of the cryosphere and OHC variations below 2000m).

The OHC went up, but the surface temperature did not change, so the heat was sequestered below the surface, by definition.

A significant fraction of OHC rise below 700 meters can be accomplished through warmer river runoff from the continents.

I didn't need to read farther than the title and first sentence to determine the paper you linked is irrelevant with regard to OHC rise below 700 meters and how that might effect surface temperature in the future.

Hence, the OHC integrated down to 700 m shows some slowdown, but the implication is that the missing heat is being deposited mainly in the region below 700 m depth.