Sentences with phrase «used in the ocean heat content»

A total of 2.3 million salinity profiles were used in this analysis, about one - third of the amount of data used in the ocean heat content estimates in Section 5.2.2.

A total of 2.3 million salinity profiles were used in this analysis, about one - third of the amount of data used in the ocean heat content estimates in Section 5.2.2.

Not exact matches

We can estimate this independently using the changes in ocean heat content over the last decade or so (roughly equal to the current radiative imbalance) of ~ 0.7 W / m2, implying that this «unrealised» forcing will lead to another 0.7 × 0.75 ºC — i.e. 0.5 ºC.

For graph 2, the ocean heat content numbers are new and were not used in any model training, and for graph 3, the true projections started in 1984 as stated.

Last week there was a paper by Smith and colleagues in Science that tried to fill in those early years, using a model that initialises the heat content from the upper ocean — with the idea that the structure of those anomalies control the «weather» progression over the next few years.

This is at least ten additional years compared to the majority of previously published studies that have used the instrumental record in attempts to constrain the ECS.We show that the additional 10 years of data, and especially 10 years of additional ocean heat content data, have significantly narrowed the probability density function of the ECS.

Bosse, 5.6 (+ / - 0.4), Statistical As in the last year, I used two variables for a forecast of the September 2015 Sea Ice Extent: The Heat Content of the Arctic Ocean northward 65 deg.

DK12 used ocean heat content (OHC) data for the upper 700 meters of oceans to draw three main conclusions: 1) that the rate of OHC increase has slowed in recent years (the very short timeframe of 2002 to 2008), 2) that this is evidence for periods of «climate shifts», and 3) that the recent OHC data indicate that the net climate feedback is negative, which would mean that climate sensitivity (the total amount of global warming in response to a doubling of atmospheric CO2 levels, including feedbacks) is low.

The data used in estimating the Levitus et al. (2005a) ocean temperature fields (for the above heat content estimates) do not include sea surface temperature (SST) observations, which are discussed in Chapter 3.

The consistency between these two data sets gives confidence in the ocean temperature data set used for estimating depth - integrated heat content, and supports the trends in SST reported in Chapter 3.

In the present study, satellite altimetric height and historically available in situ temperature data were combined using the method developed by Willis et al. [2003], to produce global estimates of upper ocean heat content, thermosteric expansion, and temperature variability over the 10.5 - year period from the beginning of 1993 through mid-2003.In the present study, satellite altimetric height and historically available in situ temperature data were combined using the method developed by Willis et al. [2003], to produce global estimates of upper ocean heat content, thermosteric expansion, and temperature variability over the 10.5 - year period from the beginning of 1993 through mid-2003.in situ temperature data were combined using the method developed by Willis et al. [2003], to produce global estimates of upper ocean heat content, thermosteric expansion, and temperature variability over the 10.5 - year period from the beginning of 1993 through mid-2003...

I would suggest that a new proxy for heat being stored (or lost) from the Earth climate system be developed based on Total System Enthalpy, using a combination of moist enthalpy in the troposphere (after Pielke Sr.), ocean heat content, and total ice mass on the planet.

This includes maintaining Argo, the main system for monitoring ocean heat content, and the development of Deep Argo to monitor the lower half of the ocean; the use of ship - based subsurface ocean temperature monitoring programs; advancements in robotic technologies such as autonomous underwater vehicles to monitor waters adjacent to land (like islands or coastal regions); and further development of real - or near - real - time deep ocean remote sensing methods.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/01/2010-updates-to-model-data-comparisons/ in this post comment 36 Gavin says that models where not used to calculate ocean heat content past 2003, so no one is using actual model output during this comparison.

The evolution of global mean surface temperatures, zonal means and fields of sea surface temperatures, land surface temperatures, precipitation, outgoing longwave radiation, vertically integrated diabatic heating and divergence of atmospheric energy transports, and ocean heat content in the Pacific is documented using correlation and regression analysis.

Actually Fielding's use of that graph is quite informative of how denialist arguments are framed — the selected bit of a selected graph (and don't mention the fastest warming region on the planet being left out of that data set), or the complete passing over of short term variability vs longer term trends, or the other measures and indicators of climate change from ocean heat content and sea levels to changes in ice sheets and minimum sea ice levels, or the passing over of issues like lag time between emissions and effects on temperatures... etc..

Arguably, the most appropriate single variable in the Earth's system that can be used to measure global warming is ocean heat content - from the surface to the seafloor.

Hi Bart, Could I just point out that Ocean Heat Content, given that the oceans represent the largest thermal mass involved in the climate system by far, is the right metric to use as a bellweather for future surface temperature trends.

I do however suspect that this is not the whole story as the legend on their graph is Ocean Heat Content 0 - 700m and one might conclude that the modelled values also refer to just this portion and so the remainder could be anything but the paper I quite there gives us a steer on how Model E used to perform in this respect.

Domingues et al (2008) and Levitus et al (2009) have recently estimated the multi-decadal upper ocean heat content using best - known corrections to systematic errors in the fall rate of expendable bathythermographs (Wijffels et al, 2008).

Ensemble decadal prediction simulations using the Community Earth System Model (CESM) can skillfully predict past decadal rates of Atlantic winter sea ice change because they do well at predicting THC - driven ocean heat content change in the vicinity of the winter sea ice edge in the Labrador, Greenland, Irminger, and Barents Seas.

Given past work at attempting water bath stabilised temperatures in good laboratory surroundings, I'd hazard a guess that the best one can do, in the sense of all variation in a natural setting, as about + / -0.1 deg C for uses such as ocean heat content.

The way I see it, if you get various data points of ocean heat content, you then have to plot a trend to see how that is changing with the other changes in incoming and outgoing radiation and greenhouse gases andland use etc..

«Our results demonstrate how synergistic use of satellite TOA radiation observations and recently improved ocean heat content measurements, with appropriate error estimates, provide critical data for quantifying short - term and longer - term changes in the Earth's net TOA radiation imbalance.

The method preferred by the GWPF report, and that which Lewis has used in his own papers, involves estimating climate sensitivity using a combination of recent instrumental temperature data (including ocean heat content data), less complex climate models, and statistics.

Thus a proportion of incoming solar energy (in the infrared) never gets into the oceans to affect the ocean heat content (I prefer the term ocean energy content and will use it from now on).

To be fair, Rahmstorf is arguing against using ocean heat content in the context of a «climate policy target», R Gates has suggested it in the context of «gains in Earth's climate system energy levels».

Willis et al. (2004) used satellite altimetric height combined with about 900,000 in situ ocean temperature profiles to produce global estimates of upper - ocean (upper 750 m) heat content on interannual timescales from mid-1993 to 2002 (see Figure 4 - 3).

Several estimates of the trend in ocean heat content have been made using the ARGO network of ocean floats, satellite observations of ocean altimetry (Levitus et al., 2000, 2001; Willis et al., 2003), and climate models (Barnett et al., 2001; Crowley et al., 2003).

Bearing in mind Rahmstorf's argument about using ocean heat content though, which of the stefans do you agree with most?

«The assessment is supported additionally by a complementary analysis in which the parameters of an Earth System Model of Intermediate Complexity (EMIC) were constrained using observations of near - surface temperature and ocean heat content, as well as prior information on the magnitudes of forcings, and which concluded that GHGs have caused 0.6 °C to 1.1 °C (5 to 95 % uncertainty) warming since the mid-20th century (Huber and Knutti, 2011); an analysis by Wigley and Santer (2013), who used an energy balance model and RF and climate sensitivity estimates from AR4, and they concluded that there was about a 93 % chance that GHGs caused a warming greater than observed over the 1950 — 2005 period; and earlier detection and attribution studies assessed in the AR4 (Hegerl et al., 2007b).»

For those interested in the RPS weblog, go to http://climatesci.org/page/2/?s=ocean+heat+content&submit=Search and use «ocean heat content» in the search window.

I remember Roger Sr.'s arguments in favour of using ocean heat content (OHC), rather than atmospheric temperatures.

In a paper, «Heat Capacity, Time Constant, and Sensitivity of Earth's Climate System» soon to be published in the Journal of Geophysical Research (and discussed briefly at RealClimate a few weeks back), Stephen Schwartz of Brookhaven National Laboratory estimates climate sensitivity using observed 20th - century data on ocean heat content and global surface temperaturIn a paper, «Heat Capacity, Time Constant, and Sensitivity of Earth's Climate System» soon to be published in the Journal of Geophysical Research (and discussed briefly at RealClimate a few weeks back), Stephen Schwartz of Brookhaven National Laboratory estimates climate sensitivity using observed 20th - century data on ocean heat content and global surface temperatHeat Capacity, Time Constant, and Sensitivity of Earth's Climate System» soon to be published in the Journal of Geophysical Research (and discussed briefly at RealClimate a few weeks back), Stephen Schwartz of Brookhaven National Laboratory estimates climate sensitivity using observed 20th - century data on ocean heat content and global surface temperaturin the Journal of Geophysical Research (and discussed briefly at RealClimate a few weeks back), Stephen Schwartz of Brookhaven National Laboratory estimates climate sensitivity using observed 20th - century data on ocean heat content and global surface temperatheat content and global surface temperature.

You might get better results using data starting in 1850 (or 1851 — there is a slight jump) rather than 1900, and TOA radiative imbalance rather than ocean heat content data, for your analysis.

The NODC's Ocean Heat Content data used in Figure 1 (and in the other ocean heat content graphs in this post) is the only regularly updated dataset of its kind that's available to the public on a gridded basis through the KNMI Climate ExplOcean Heat Content data used in Figure 1 (and in the other ocean heat content graphs in this post) is the only regularly updated dataset of its kind that's available to the public on a gridded basis through the KNMI Climate ExploHeat Content data used in Figure 1 (and in the other ocean heat content graphs in this post) is the only regularly updated dataset of its kind that's available to the public on a gridded basis through the KNMI Climate ExContent data used in Figure 1 (and in the other ocean heat content graphs in this post) is the only regularly updated dataset of its kind that's available to the public on a gridded basis through the KNMI Climate Explocean heat content graphs in this post) is the only regularly updated dataset of its kind that's available to the public on a gridded basis through the KNMI Climate Exploheat content graphs in this post) is the only regularly updated dataset of its kind that's available to the public on a gridded basis through the KNMI Climate Excontent graphs in this post) is the only regularly updated dataset of its kind that's available to the public on a gridded basis through the KNMI Climate Explorer.

In my opinion, measuring the heat content of the oceans can not necessarily be used to assess sensitivity since a slight change in the amount of cloudiness has a significant impact on the amout of solar radiation being received by the oceanIn my opinion, measuring the heat content of the oceans can not necessarily be used to assess sensitivity since a slight change in the amount of cloudiness has a significant impact on the amout of solar radiation being received by the oceanin the amount of cloudiness has a significant impact on the amout of solar radiation being received by the oceans.