The regional patterns of anthropogenic CO2 storage are consistent with those of CFCs and
with changes in heat content.
Not exact matches
Use language appropriate to the visitor based on the target audience
Heat maps show an F pattern is used when scanning
content, so using bold headings and sub-headings to make it easier to scan and break up a copy
Change paragraphs to bulleted lists Put the main point first (inverted pyramid) Use personal pronouns Put yourself
in the place of the visitor and consider questions the visitor may have, then get to the point
with the answer Add links, if appropriate, to keep the visitor engaged on your site and to keep them from searching elsewhere Name links (and anchor text)
in a way that the visitor will know what to expect when they click Find out what keywords visitors are searching for to reach your site and write
with these keywords
in mind These tips are a great starting point for anyone wanting to optimize their website
content.
However, radiation
changes at the top of the atmosphere from the 1980s to 1990s, possibly related
in part to the El Niño - Southern Oscillation (ENSO) phenomenon, appear to be associated
with reductions
in tropical upper - level cloud cover, and are linked to
changes in the energy budget at the surface and
changes in observed ocean
heat content.
However, lacking global observations of surface mass and ocean
heat content capable of resolving year to year variations
with sufficient accuracy, comprehensive diagnosis of the events early
in the altimetry record (e.g. such as determining the relative roles of thermal expansion versus mass
changes) has remained elusive.
Observed
changes in ocean
heat content have now been shown to be inconsistent
with simulated natural climate variability, but consistent
with a combination of natural and anthropogenic influences both on a global scale, and
in individual ocean basins.
And this is just one element
in the sea level rise — small ice caps are melting faster, thermal expansion will increase
in line
with ocean
heat content changes and Antarctic ice sheets are also losing mass.
The ocean
heat content analysis by Barnett (and
in other groups) show that the
changes are most consistent
with the GHGs becoming increasingly dominant over this time.
The key points of the paper are that: i) model simulations
with 20th century forcings are able to match the surface air temperature record, ii) they also match the measured
changes of ocean
heat content over the last decade, iii) the implied planetary imbalance (the amount of excess energy the Earth is currently absorbing) which is roughly equal to the ocean
heat uptake, is significant and growing, and iv) this implies both that there is significant
heating «
in the pipeline», and that there is an important lag
in the climate's full response to
changes in the forcing.
My guess is that
heat content changes related to ENSO events and their interaction
with decadal variability
in the gyres are probably responsible, but I'm basically just handwaving here.
Previous work by Barnett's group showed that coupled models when forced
with greenhouse gases did give ocean
heat content changes similar to that shown
in the data.
If you can't keep up
with annual - decadal
changes in the TOA radiative imbalance or ocean
heat content (because of failure to correctly model
changes in the atmosphere and ocean due to natural variability), then your climate model lacks fidelity to the real world system it is tasked to represent.
Gavin, you forget the Hadcm3 model tests
with 10 x solar and 5 x volcanic, which found that the model probably underestimates solar variations
with a factor 2... Btw, the largest
changes in the ocean
heat content are found
in the (sub) tropics, where insolation differences are at their maximum.
Instead, they discuss new ways of playing around
with the aerosol judge factor needed to explain why 20th - century warming is about half of the warming expected for increased
in GHGs; and then expand their list of fudge factors to include smaller volcanos, stratospheric water vapor (published
with no estimate of uncertainty for the predicted
change in Ts), transfer of
heat to the deeper ocean (where
changes in heat content are hard to accurately measure), etc..
Dana, I think you are pushing
in the right direction
with this;
heat content is a much more direct measure of the underlying
changes to the climate system than average air temperatures and climate science communicators should make
heat content their first response to the suggestion that global warming is something that waxes and (allegedly, recently) wanes.
This was my mental equation dF = dH / dt + lambda * dT where dF is the forcing
change over a given period (1955 - 2010), dH / dt is the rate of
change of ocean
heat content, and dT is the surface temperature
change in the same period,
with lambda being the equilibrium sensitivity parameter, so the last term is the Planck response to balance the forcing
in the absence of ocean storage
changes.
The cloud cover
changes are consistent
with changes in ocean
heat content in the satellite era.
The upper figure shows
changes in ocean
heat content since 1958, while the lower map shows ocean
heat content in 2017 relative to the average ocean
heat content between 1981 and 2010,
with red areas showing warmer ocean
heat content than over the past few decades and blue areas showing cooler.
However, the spatial pattern of the PDO includes warming
in some places and cooling
in others;
in fact,
changes consistent
with the PDO can be seen
in the geographic pattern of observed ocean
heat content changes.
It is clear that natural variability has dominated sea level rise during the 20th century,
with changes in ocean
heat content and
changes in precipitation patterns.
With a dominant internal component having the structure of the observed warming, and with radiative restoring strong enough to keep the forced component small, how can one keep the very strong radiative restoring from producing heat loss from the oceans totally inconsistent with any measures of changes in oceanic heat cont
With a dominant internal component having the structure of the observed warming, and
with radiative restoring strong enough to keep the forced component small, how can one keep the very strong radiative restoring from producing heat loss from the oceans totally inconsistent with any measures of changes in oceanic heat cont
with radiative restoring strong enough to keep the forced component small, how can one keep the very strong radiative restoring from producing
heat loss from the oceans totally inconsistent
with any measures of changes in oceanic heat cont
with any measures of
changes in oceanic
heat content?
''... how can one keep the very strong radiative restoring from producing
heat loss from the oceans totally inconsistent
with any measures of
changes in oceanic
heat content?»
In a discussion with Sydney Levitus, the Lead Author of «World ocean heat content and thermosteric sea level change (0 — 2000 m), 1955 — 2010» I was intrigued by something he asked me to look up in the paper, which at that time I had not read ye
In a discussion
with Sydney Levitus, the Lead Author of «World ocean
heat content and thermosteric sea level
change (0 — 2000 m), 1955 — 2010» I was intrigued by something he asked me to look up
in the paper, which at that time I had not read ye
in the paper, which at that time I had not read yet:
We present an analysis to illustrate why temperature values at specific levels will depend on wind speed, and
with the same boundary layer
heat content change, trends
in temperature should be expected to be different at every height near the surface when the winds are light, as well as different between light wind and stronger wind nights.
Elsewhere on this site there is a graph of overall ocean
heat content which is building indicating that while the sst is decreasing slightly the overall ocean is warming, It is likely that this overall ocean warming which has nothing to do
with changes to the atmospheric temperature because it is the sea surface and not the deep ocean that is
in contact
with the atmosphere is what is resulting
in the overall rise
in atmospheric CO2 concentration which is currenly increasing at 2ppmv / year.
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.
It is an interesting paper, but I would suggest caution: Argo measurements of
heat content, combined
with earlier (and spotty) measurements, suggest there has not been a great deal of
change in the rate of
heat accumulation over the past 20 years.
A
change in ocean
heat content can also alter patterns of ocean circulation, which can have far - reaching effects on global climate conditions, including
changes to the outcome and pattern of meteorological events such as tropical storms, and also temperatures
in the northern Atlantic region, which are strongly influenced by currents that may be substantially reduced
with CO2 increase
in the atmosphere.
Here's one of the many problems I have
with their figures for the
change in ocean
heat content.
As seen
in Figure 4 - 3, the ocean warming occurred
in the later years of the record
with little
change in globally averaged ocean
heat content prior to 1997.
Apparently, these GCMs can «forecast» climate
change only «a posteriori», that is, for example, if we want to know what may happen
with these GCMs from 2012 to 2020 we need first to wait the 2020 and then adjust the GCM model
with ad - hoc physical explanations including even an appeal to an unpredictable «red - noise» fluctuation of the ocean
heat content and flux system (occurring
in the model
in 2055 and 2075!)
One of the points Roy made: a
change in ocean
heat content is presented
in terms that look impressive: Joules times 10 ^ 22 or Joules
with oodles of trailing zeroes.
«It's clear
with more «
heat in the kitchen from the Beltway» that further modest
changes to their business model around advertising and news feeds /
content could be
in store over the next 12 to 18 months,» he wrote.