Climate Change Banter

[bluewave]

IMO I'm convinced a lot of the change is being absorbed by the oceans and not just at the surface but all the way down. Anyone that spends a lot of time on the water from Alaska to California or Florida to Nova Scotia can tell you things are quickly changing on a massive scale in various fisheries. We lack deep to mid ocean temp data.

The shift is happening so quickly I wonder how well we are going to be able to adapt. Primary and secondary food sources are rapidly moving to deeper, colder water.

This is no statement on the cause as I don't care.

 

It may be that the oceans can absorb more heat that we thought before.

 

http://judithcurry.com/2013/11/01/pacific-ocean-heat-content-for-the-past-10000-years/

 

Yair Rosenthal: The fact that 300 years ago the ocean heat content was so low, I use the word capacitor in the paper. We can charge it a lot…. Maybe the ocean is taking the heat more and won’t exhale it as much. That’s the challenge I have for the modelers.

[skierinvermont]

It may be that the oceans can absorb more heat that we thought before.

 

http://judithcurry.com/2013/11/01/pacific-ocean-heat-content-for-the-past-10000-years/

 

Yair Rosenthal: The fact that 300 years ago the ocean heat content was so low, I use the word capacitor in the paper. We can charge it a lot…. Maybe the ocean is taking the heat more and won’t exhale it as much. That’s the challenge I have for the modelers.

 

That statement does not make sense. If the oceans are 'taking the heat more' it just means it will take longer to reach equilibrium. In fact, it means that we are farther from equilibrium than we thought and climate sensitivity is larger than we thought.

 

"Won't exhale it as much" seems to be a vague reference to the 'heat in the pipeline' fallacy. 

[bluewave]

That statement does not make sense. If the oceans are 'taking the heat more' it just means it will take longer to reach equilibrium. In fact, it means that we are farther from equilibrium than we thought and climate sensitivity is larger than we thought.

 

"Won't exhale it as much" seems to be a vague reference to the 'heat in the pipeline' fallacy. 

 

That's a statement from one the scientists that wrote the paper in the comments section.

 

 

Pacific Ocean Heat Content During the Past 10,000 Years

1. Yair Rosenthal¹,*, 
2. Braddock K. Linsley², 
3. Delia W. Oppo³

+Author Affiliations

1. ¹Institute for Marine and Coastal Sciences and Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Rutgers University, 71 Dudley Road, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA.
2. ²Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, Palisades, NY 10964, USA.
3. ³Department of Geology and Geophysics, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA 02543, USA.

1. ↵*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]

• ABSTRACT
• EDITOR'S SUMMARY

Observed increases in ocean heat content (OHC) and temperature are robust indicators of global warming during the past several decades. We used high-resolution proxy records from sediment cores to extend these observations in the Pacific 10,000 years beyond the instrumental record. We show that water masses linked to North Pacific and Antarctic intermediate waters were warmer by 2.1 ± 0.4°C and 1.5 ± 0.4°C, respectively, during the middle Holocene Thermal Maximum than over the past century. Both water masses were ~0.9°C warmer during the Medieval Warm period than during the Little Ice Age and ~0.65° warmer than in recent decades. Although documented changes in global surface temperatures during the Holocene and Common era are relatively small, the concomitant changes in OHC are large.

[Clinch Leatherwood]

Unless you have the data, preferably raw and adjusted, it's just speculation. The OHC was "rapidly rising" for decades and so were surface land temps, now land temps are flat and OHC charts changed trajectory after a more accurate network went into action. So, either the heat is simply missing or forcing was erroneously over estimated in the past.

It's pretty well documented that fish of all types are moving to colder and deeper water. You can look up the recent studies yourself for the northwest Atlantic. In the most recent at least 50% of the species tracked had moved decidedly away from historic grounds towards colder and deeper waters.

Note this is not the study I was referencing but another that has similar results

http://m.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/worlds-fish-have-been-moving-to-cooler-waters-for-decades-study-finds/2013/05/15/730292e8-bcd7-11e2-9b09-1638acc3942e_story.html

[Clinch Leatherwood]

And this isn't it either Jonger but was another similar study. Things are changing way more rapidly than some thing whatever the reason. It accelerated tremendously last season.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/tech/science/environment/2009-11-12-new-england-fish-warming_N.htm

[Clinch Leatherwood]

Jonger --->. More here

I am seeing this change myself. Fishing folks don't communicate much with scientists because usually when they come around they are trying to close fisheries but this will give you some insight. You guys look at sea surface temps but what is being missed up in the northern Atlantic is that down 10+ feet temps are scorched compared to even ten years ago.

http://bangordailynews.com/slideshow/alarmingly-warm-water-in-gulf-of-maine-bringing-changes/

[The_Global_Warmer]

IMO I'm convinced a lot of the change is being absorbed by the oceans and not just at the surface but all the way down. Anyone that spends a lot of time on the water from Alaska to California or Florida to Nova Scotia can tell you things are quickly changing on a massive scale in various fisheries. We lack deep to mid ocean temp data.

The shift is happening so quickly I wonder how well we are going to be able to adapt. Primary and secondary food sources are rapidly moving to deeper, colder water.

This is no statement on the cause as I don't care.

 

 

You are dead on. 

[bluewave]

You are dead on. 

 

http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/news-events/global-heating-hiding-out-oceans

 

 

A recent slowdown in global warming has led some skeptics to renew their claims that industrial carbon emissions are not causing a century-long rise in Earth’s surface temperatures. But rather than letting humans off the hook, a new study in the leading journal Science adds support to the idea that the oceans are taking up some of the excess heat, at least for the moment. In a reconstruction of Pacific Ocean temperatures in the last 10,000 years, researchers have found that its middle depths have warmed 15 times faster in the last 60 years than they did during apparent natural warming cycles in the previous 10,000. 

 

“We’re experimenting by putting all this heat in the ocean without quite knowing how it’s going to come back out and affect climate,” said study coauthor Braddock Linsley, a climate scientist at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory. “It’s not so much the magnitude of the change, but the rate of change.”

 

[skierinvermont]

 

That's a statement from one the scientists that wrote the paper in the comments section.

 

 

 

 

I know, and it does not make sense for the reasons I gave.

[StudentOfClimatology]

If the oceans are 'taking the heat more' it just means it will take longer to reach equilibrium. In fact, it means that we are farther from equilibrium than we thought and climate sensitivity is larger than we thought.

I think you hit the nail on the head.

We know the heat capacity of water. If the oceans *seem* to be absorbing more heat, it suggests the upper mixing layer is deeper than we thought, which implies a higher climate sensitivity, as we'd be farther from thermal equilibrium relative to the rate of radiative forcing increase.

If the upper mixing layer were shallow, the current slowdown of warming is harder to explain given we'd be closer to equilibrium.

[bluewave]

I know, and it does not make sense for the reasons I gave.

 

Not necessarily. Other studies show sensitivity possibly being lower with greater ocean heat uptake. But it will take a long time

to know which set of studies are correct.

 

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00382-013-1770-4

 

Observational estimate of climate sensitivity from changes in the rate of ocean heat uptake and comparison to CMIP5 models

 

 

Abstract

Climate sensitivity is estimated based on 0–2,000 m ocean heat content and surface temperature observations from the second half of the 20th century and first decade of the 21st century, using a simple energy balance model and the change in the rate of ocean heat uptake to determine the radiative restoration strength over this time period. The relationship between this 30–50 year radiative restoration strength and longer term effective sensitivity is investigated using an ensemble of 32 model configurations from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 (CMIP5), suggesting a strong correlation between the two. The mean radiative restoration strength over this period for the CMIP5 members examined is 1.16 Wm⁻²K⁻¹, compared to 2.05 Wm⁻²K⁻¹from the observations. This suggests that temperature in these CMIP5 models may be too sensitive to perturbations in radiative forcing, although this depends on the actual magnitude of the anthropogenic aerosol forcing in the modern period. The potential change in the radiative restoration strength over longer timescales is also considered, resulting in a likely (67 %) range of 1.5–2.9 K for equilibrium climate sensitivity, and a 90 % confidence interval of 1.2–5.1 K.

[Jonger]

This would mean there is a new mechanism to the heat exchange.

It's very logical to think it's going into the deep, that makes sense.... But why would this be new, surface temps used to rise within the same system, but now have slowed down.

[The_Global_Warmer]

It's pretty well documented that fish of all types are moving to colder and deeper water. You can look up the recent studies yourself for the northwest Atlantic. In the most recent at least 50% of the species tracked had moved decidedly away from historic grounds towards colder and deeper waters.

Note this is not the study I was referencing but another that has similar results

http://m.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/worlds-fish-have-been-moving-to-cooler-waters-for-decades-study-finds/2013/05/15/730292e8-bcd7-11e2-9b09-1638acc3942e_story.html

 

We will just hunt them there until we can no longer do so.

 

 

Whole sale changes won't come until economic collapse or  incredible amounts of death take place.

 

 

Or something absurd like a huge methane blowout, a huge chunk of GIS or Antarctica sliding into the ocean.

 

But really the vanishing glaciers in the trpopical belts will be the first death blow.  The tibetan region is starting to seriously panic over teh speed at which the glaciers are vanishing. Luckily so far the water is being held up in lakes vs being frozen but it will evaporate pretty quick regardless.

[StudentOfClimatology]

Not necessarily. Other studies show sensitivity possibly being lower with greater ocean heat uptake. But it will take a long time

to know which set of studies are correct.

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00382-013-1770-4

Observational estimate of climate sensitivity from changes in the rate of ocean heat uptake and comparison to CMIP5 models

Abstract

Climate sensitivity is estimated based on 0–2,000 m ocean heat content and surface temperature observations from the second half of the 20th century and first decade of the 21st century, using a simple energy balance model and the change in the rate of ocean heat uptake to determine the radiative restoration strength over this time period. The relationship between this 30–50 year radiative restoration strength and longer term effective sensitivity is investigated using an ensemble of 32 model configurations from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 (CMIP5), suggesting a strong correlation between the two. The mean radiative restoration strength over this period for the CMIP5 members examined is 1.16 Wm⁻²K⁻¹, compared to 2.05 Wm⁻²K⁻¹from the observations. This suggests that temperature in these CMIP5 models may be too sensitive to perturbations in radiative forcing, although this depends on the actual magnitude of the anthropogenic aerosol forcing in the modern period. The potential change in the radiative restoration strength over longer timescales is also considered, resulting in a likely (67 %) range of 1.5–2.9 K for equilibrium climate sensitivity, and a 90 % confidence interval of 1.2–5.1 K.

What? Say we magically put a cap on all radiative forcing increase today..the oceans will eventually reach the required equilibrium temperature regardless of the rate at which they do so, which is determined by the depth and strength of the upper mixing layer.

The issue is perception...as anthropogenic forcing increases, we expect the oceans to warm in response. With increased vertical mixing, the oceans take longer to respond. At this stage, that would imply that climate sensitivity is higher, because we will have achieved less of the warming necessary to reach equilibrium, given the slower response.

[bluewave]

What? Say we magically put a cap on all radiative forcing increase today..the oceans will eventually reach the required equilibrium temperature regardless of the rate at which they do so, which is determined by the depth and strength of the upper mixing layer.

The issue is perception...as anthropogenic forcing increases, we expect the oceans to warm in response. With increased vertical mixing, the oceans take longer to respond. At this stage, that would imply that climate sensitivity is higher, because we will have achieved less of the warming necessary to reach equilibrium, given the slower response.

 

Not if the deeps ocean heat faster than the surface during -PDO intervals like we are in now.

 

 

 

 

 

[StudentOfClimatology]

Not if the deeps ocean heat faster than the surface during -PDO intervals like we are in now.

Abraham_2013.png

1) The deep ocean is heating for that exact reason though, no? Increased vertical mixing. It just slows the SST/upper oceanic response because you're trying to heat more water simultaneously.

2) I don't understand your PDO argument. The North Pacific is actually warmer in a -PDO. The PDO phenomenon seems to be forced by changes in atmospheric circulation, which again related to the vertical mixing issue, since wind is what induces vertical motion.

[bluewave]

1) The deep ocean is heating for that exact reason, though, no? Increased vertical mixing. It just slows the SST/upper oceanic response because you're trying to heat more water simultaneously.

2) I don't understand your PDO argument. The North Pacific is actually warmer in a -PDO. The PDO phenomenon seems to be forced by changes in atmospheric circulation, which again goes back to the vertical mixing issue.

 

It will probably be a problem that invites more study in the future to try and solve.

 

 

From a National Science Foundation article on April 15th, 2010:

“The heat will come back to haunt us sooner or later,” says NCAR scientist Kevin Trenberth, the lead author. “The reprieve we’ve had from warming temperatures in the last few years will not continue. It is critical to track the build-up of energy in our climate system so we can understand what is happening and predict our future climate.”

If the heat is well mixed in the deep ocean below 700 m, exactly how could that heat return to the surface?   The second law of thermodynamics suggests that a well mixed heat reservoir in the deep ocean would actually be very inefficient at returning heat to the surface.

We need to understand how the ocean exchanges heat vertically, between the upper ocean and deep ocean, and whether mixing in the deep ocean is more efficient than currently thought.  Until we understand this, we won’t know to what extent this heat will remain sequestered in the deep ocean.

http://judithcurry.com/2013/06/18/ocean-heat-content-discussion-thread/

[Clinch Leatherwood]

This would mean there is a new mechanism to the heat exchange.It's very logical to think it's going into the deep, that makes sense.... But why would this be new, surface temps used to rise within the same system, but now have slowed down.

Something else is going on up here as the changes are so dramatic it's hard to almost believe. The NAO plays a roll too in driving currents but there is more at work. What we think we know and what the next 20 years will show we actually knew are likely very different. There's a pretty massive shift taking place in the northwest Atlantic these last 3/4 years

[The_Global_Warmer]

Regardless of pattern. When was the last time there wasn't a ribbon of extremely warm ssta along the NAEC?  This doesn't even account for how much warming is taking place below the ocean surface.

 

[Jonger]

Something else is going on up here as the changes are so dramatic it's hard to almost believe. The NAO plays a roll too in driving currents but there is more at work. What we think we know and what the next 20 years will show we actually knew are likely very different. There's a pretty massive shift taking place in the northwest Atlantic these last 3/4 years

 

Where are you at? I'm trying to figure out what you are taking about? Are you trying to say the thin strip of warm water anomalies along the NE is some global epidemic. BTW, I'm in the seafood industry and I haven't heard a word about fishing issues relating to warm water. The only thing I am aware of is the lobster glut from warm coastal waters, but that limited to the coast and has been beneficial to the industry so far.

[AvantHiatus]

Every time I analyze that Pacific warm pool I just become mind-blown and it makes the anomalous 2012 SST event off the east coast appear marginal. I can attest directly that warmer waters affect commercial fishing populations greatly.

 

http://www.ctpost.com/news/article/Tropical-fish-are-moving-in-as-Long-Island-Sound-581383.php

 

Unfortunately there is alot of evidence backing up the significance of this event and its unprecedented nature. We can see this in the record drought and above normal warmth along the west coast. 

 

While not directly caused by the warm SST's, it is the result of this long-term pattern that has locked in for quite some time.

 

We have to bring the energy imbalance back into equilibrium by sequestering carbon, allowing the oceans to torch away at 400 ppm for any length of time is dangerous.

 

My guess is we will see more warm pools popping up in the next few years, perhaps a new accelerating trend in SSTs mabye to an extent they almost catch up to surface benchmark of 0.8c. Of course, ocean temperature trends always lead surface temperatures by a year or so.

[Clinch Leatherwood]

Where are you at? I'm trying to figure out what you are taking about? Are you trying to say the thin strip of warm water anomalies along the NE is some global epidemic. BTW, I'm in the seafood industry and I haven't heard a word about fishing issues relating to warm water. The only thing I am aware of is the lobster glut from warm coastal waters, but that limited to the coast and has been beneficial to the industry so far.

It's not a thin strip and it's crushed the lobster industry from just south of cape cod and points south. It's crushed the cod etc around New England. It's putting people out of business.

There's a difference between being "in" the seafood industry and being on the water and around and knowing the people that have done this stuff for decades. Most are in awe of the changes these last 3-5 years.

Last winter we had right whales calving off of boston for the first time in recorded history. Animals large and small are changing their behavior in alarming numbers. This summer right whales were absent from all of their normal grounds. Instead of seeing hundreds they saw a half dozen. Ten years ago they were rarely spotted ever around the cape and now they are back again already in the dead of winter

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/01/06/large-number-right-whales-seen-cape-cod-bay/55BYcgmnQQlHixMI2HQgNP/story.html

The changes are happening very fast. It's impossible to ignore or claim it's not happening if you spend any time at all on the water or near it.

http://e360.yale.edu/feature/a_north_atlantic_mystery_case_of_the_missing_whales/2715/

[Clinch Leatherwood]

Jonger a pretty decent article. The sharp changes I would say started in 2010....but was really noticeable by 2011 as this article points out. Noticeable as in its hard to miss a bunch of 30 ton animals that were never here before suddenly showing up in massive numbers

http://provincetown.m.wickedlocal.com/wkdProvincetow/pm_121874/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=6PKrbihM

“We’re not seeing more whales because there’re more whales in the Atlantic, we’re seeing more whales because more are choosing to come here. That’s a distinct change that’s statistically provable.”

[Jonger]

It's not a thin strip and it's crushed the lobster industry from just south of cape cod and points south. It's crushed the cod etc around New England. It's putting people out of business.

There's a difference between being "in" the seafood industry and being on the water and around and knowing the people that have done this stuff for decades. Most are in awe of the changes these last 3-5 years.

Last winter we had right whales calving off of boston for the first time in recorded history. Animals large and small are changing their behavior in alarming numbers. This summer right whales were absent from all of their normal grounds. Instead of seeing hundreds they saw a half dozen. Ten years ago they were rarely spotted ever around the cape and now they are back again already in the dead of winter

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/01/06/large-number-right-whales-seen-cape-cod-bay/55BYcgmnQQlHixMI2HQgNP/story.html

The changes are happening very fast. It's impossible to ignore or claim it's not happening if you spend any time at all on the water or near it.

http://e360.yale.edu/feature/a_north_atlantic_mystery_case_of_the_missing_whales/2715/

 

Chinese cod is putting people out of business, the lobster industry has been taken over my Nova Scotia lobster hauls.

 

American origin cod has been dead since China started processing Northern European cod.

 

Has NOTHING to do with 3 degree warmer water off the coast.

 

Whatever the situation is off the northeast coast, I feel for those people, but as a whole, Chinese seafood has been a thorn in my side. I don't particularly like selling Chinese product, but there isn't anything else competitive out of the atlantic.

 

Yes, I said China and Atlantic in the same sentence, these are Norwegian companies shipping their Norway caught product to china on a freezer hold ship.

[Clinch Leatherwood]

Chinese cod is putting people out of business, the lobster industry has been taken over my Nova Scotia lobster hauls.

American origin cod has been dead since China started processing Northern European cod.

Has NOTHING to do with 3 degree warmer water off the coast.

Whatever the situation is off the northeast coast, I feel for those people, but as a whole, Chinese seafood has been a thorn in my side. I don't particularly like selling Chinese product, but there isn't anything else competitive out of the atlantic.

Because they can't get to them and sell them to you at a price that's anywhere near what the Chinese will do.

Chinese cod has nothing to do with what's going on with the lobsters just south of here nor does it have anything to do with right whales making monumental changes to their habits and showing up here.

Note this article doesn't blame Nova Scotia or the Chinese. Long Island was shut down because of lack of lobster

http://www.newsday.com/long-island/lobstermen-brace-after-li-sound-closed-to-fishing-1.6013464

[Jonger]

Because they can't get to them and sell them to you at a price that's anywhere near what the Chinese will do.

Chinese cod has nothing to do with what's going on with the lobsters just south of here nor does it have anything to do with right whales making monumental changes to their habits and showing up here.

Note this article doesn't blame Nova Scotia or the Chinese. Long Island was shut down because of lack of lobster

http://www.newsday.com/long-island/lobstermen-brace-after-li-sound-closed-to-fishing-1.6013464

 

That's a real bummer....

 

I wonder if an active storm season would change those water temps, its definitely piled up against the coast.

[Clinch Leatherwood]

That's a real bummer....

I wonder if an active storm season would change those water temps, its definitely piled up against the coast.

Jonger sorry to be short in tone I'm on my phone....just tossing out the articles etc so please excuse the sharpness.

It's ugly and it's weird. The whales in particular. This year the right whales and humpies vanished north of the cape. Nobody knows where they went or why. Something is happening that is really tough to fully understand yet. I don't think it's just the last few years or this particular set of patterns. I've read that the gulf of Maine has seen a dramatic decrease in salinity during the same time period which conflicts with the theory that the Newfoundland current is weaker or displaced. Right now it seems to be everything at once from Copepods to whales that are being dramatically effected and nobody seems to really know why. What they do know is water temperatures are warmer way down.

Maybe sustained intrusions will help to dissipate that heat or maybe scientists misunderstood where the heat was going and how it would feed back I'm not sure. I take no side on the climate change issue and was probably a sceptic until these last few years.

I wonder if instead of in the air and sky the real effects of the changes taking place are in the water?

[ORH_wxman]

It will probably be a problem that invites more study in the future to try and solve.

 

 

From a National Science Foundation article on April 15th, 2010:

“The heat will come back to haunt us sooner or later,” says NCAR scientist Kevin Trenberth, the lead author. “The reprieve we’ve had from warming temperatures in the last few years will not continue. It is critical to track the build-up of energy in our climate system so we can understand what is happening and predict our future climate.”

If the heat is well mixed in the deep ocean below 700 m, exactly how could that heat return to the surface?   The second law of thermodynamics suggests that a well mixed heat reservoir in the deep ocean would actually be very inefficient at returning heat to the surface.

We need to understand how the ocean exchanges heat vertically, between the upper ocean and deep ocean, and whether mixing in the deep ocean is more efficient than currently thought.  Until we understand this, we won’t know to what extent this heat will remain sequestered in the deep ocean.

http://judithcurry.com/2013/06/18/ocean-heat-content-discussion-thread/

 

 

If the much deeper vertical mixing in the ocean actually exists (compared to what is currently thought), then even if the ECS is high, its almost a moot point since it will take so long for it to be realized.

 

The TCR (Transient Climate Response) is what we really care about. That is where we'd see "rapid changes" that are the most damaging. The IPCC projections (and others) that policy proposals are based off of assume that most of the ECS is realized in the TCR...which is why they forecast temperature rises in the 21st century of near 3C in a business as usual scenario.

 

If we have a 3C equilibrium sensitivity but only half of it is realized in the TCR and the rest takes hundreds of years to achieve, then its much more easily adaptable. Its definitely a question that needs to be answered, because its far different than if most of a 3C ECS is realized in the TCR.

[New Englander]

It becomes mind boggling when analyzing the ocean and trying to predict with the variables at hand but it is fascinating at the same time.. To be very overly simplistic, I worry about a rapid change, talking decade or two, where we edge ourselves to the tipping point then look out below. Then it becomes a matter of what can adapt to such massive changes. I certainly don't want such a scenario. The long term PH of the oceans is something that is troubling, one of many troubling issues.

[AvantHiatus]

It becomes mind boggling when analyzing the ocean and trying to predict with the variables at hand but it is fascinating at the same time.. To be very overly simplistic, I worry about a rapid change, talking decade or two, where we edge ourselves to the tipping point then look out below. Then it becomes a matter of what can adapt to such massive changes. I certainly don't want such a scenario. The long term PH of the oceans is something that is troubling, one of many troubling issues.

Definitely something to consider, the significant feature of recent NAEC SSTs is that they have remained warm even in colder years like 2013, albeit the east coast was not as cold as the central US.

 

Overall, it appears to be a heat transport phenomenon either from the disappearance/weakening of the Labrador current or an intrusion of the Gulf stream. Perhaps a culmination of both processes.

 

As a result, I do not think one year of stormy weather will fix the problem. I've read that deeper parts of the ocean are also warming so eventually up-welling will be less effective as a mitigation factor.