2014 Global Temperatures

[Jonger]

I found one back to Jan 13th.  We are definitely in the middle of a substansial SSTA climb.  Pretty impressive considering the overall temps for January have been running very warm.

 

 

What is up with the random pools of 3+ C anomalies. Though it's harder to see these localized pools when SSTA is average together worldwide. Must be some massive high pressure systems or something.

 

Seeing it outside of the arctic is even more impressive, considering arctic amplification and how vulnerable it is to torch up there.

Weather pattern feedbacks.... The negative EPO high pressure is almost self generating now. I don't fully understand the mechanism, but that's what I gather from reading on other forums.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Holy SSTA warming batman. 

[The_Global_Warmer]

The arctic is progged to be 3.3C above normal for the next 8 day by the 12z GFS.  This includes part of the Russian cold spell but not the US cold spells.

 

 

 

[StudentOfClimatology]

Disagree completely. There's already peer review evidence that the models suggesting more rapid rises in the TCR are way outside the their confidence intervals for even a 15-20 hindcast from the mid 1990s.

That doesn't mean it's a lock that those models will fail in their projections later this century, but I think it is incorrect to state "there is nothing to suggest that predictions will fail". There is already building evidence that the TCR is below the IPCC GCMs. If there was nothing wrong with the GCMs projections, we wouldn't be seeing recent peer reviewed papers on them failing and even the IPCC wouldn't support a TCR that is below their models (like they do in the final draft of AR5) .

I'm in agreement with the idea that most GCMs underestimate the magnitude/depth of the primary oceanic mixing layer..however I'm looking at this on a 50-100yr scale. I could care less about short, decadal length hiatus periods, or accelerations for that matter, because with a slower TCR, you'd expect them to occur. A slower TCR at this point would suggest a higher climate sensitivity than a rapid TCR. Climate sensitivity is what I care about.

I think the current "hiatus" in warming is being given too much attention, especially because it gives skeptics hallucinatory ammo. If the hiatus continues for another 10 years or temps begin to cool, then we can talk.

[csnavywx]

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2013/12/the-global-temperature-jigsaw/

[bluewave]

I'm in agreement with the idea that most GCMs underestimate the magnitude/depth of the primary oceanic mixing layer..however I'm looking at this on a 50-100yr scale. I could care less about short, decadal length hiatus periods, or accelerations for that matter, because with a slower TCR, you'd expect them to occur. A slower TCR at this point would suggest a higher climate sensitivity than a rapid TCR. Climate sensitivity is what I care about.

I think the current "hiatus" in warming is being given too much attention, especially because it gives skeptics hallucinatory ammo. If the hiatus continues for another 10 years or temps begin to cool, then we can talk.

 

It's probably better not to publish specific temperature forecasts beyond 5 years since the scientists that do

leave themselves open to criticism if they don't verify. A simple statement like we know that increasing carbon 

emissions will cause the earth to warm over the long term but we just aren't sure of the magnitude yet would

suffice. People respect it when scientists admit uncertainty.

 

It will be interesting the see the 2014 update coming from the Met Office in a few days.

 

2013 forecast

 

[The_Global_Warmer]

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2013/12/the-global-temperature-jigsaw/

 

 

Not that it really matters but before I ever saw that.  That is how I envisioned the rest of this decade.

 

Assuming Aerosols have had a role and China is really cutting down per the mandate to drop So2 emissions dramatically between 2012-2015.  Not sure how much India is going to offset that.

 

Co2 will hit 403PPM this May in Hawaii.  Methane is rising slowly but has shown a slight acceleration the last 18 months.

 

If Co2 averages 2.5-3ppm per year till 2020 it will be at 418-420ppm during peak months.  If it averages 3-3.5ppm the next decade it will be at 450-455ppm during peak months. 

 

Methane should also increase substantially during this time as more and more is released with cryosphere warming.

 

Add that in with cleaning up So2 pollution and radiative forcing will see quite the bump in a short period. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bottom line is we have seen OHC really take a step upwards substantially for the first time since the mid 2000s.  On top of the peak tri-monthlies of OHC.  The bottom side of the cycles are also going up. 

 

If we see this jump over the 15 mark at some point this year.  I think a step up in surface temps is imminent. 

 

 

[The_Global_Warmer]

The CFS dailies have stopped their drop so far the last two days hovering around .12 to .14C. 

 

 

The monthly is still right at .125C with 8 and half days left.

[Jonger]

That Roger Jones chart has mega-bust written all over it... That shows a dramatic warming over the next 5-10 years.

 

I never understand why any of these charts show LONG term peaks and valleys, this should never be presented in a non-smoothed format.

[AvantHiatus]

That Roger Jones chart has mega-bust written all over it... That shows a dramatic warming over the next 5-10 years.

 

I never understand why any of these charts show LONG term peaks and valleys, this should never be presented in a non-smoothed format.

If anything this representation of global temps is too conservative and like you said, the peaks and valleys cannot be forecasted that far out.

 

The dramatic warming would make sense as positive forcing increases and we observe our next super el nino event (it usually happens every 16-18 years). However, I believe that a rapid rise to around 1.3 c above pre-industrial would set us up for nasty cryosphere warming, more so than this chart conveys.

 

This next decade is really a key period for climate predictions. It seems our climate is an all or nothing system.

 

In other words once you reach a certain temperature you cannot go back on human-based timescales and also that the rate of temperature rise takes on a more exponential character rather than a linear progression.

 

The two main camps (most likely) I see are 1.5 C by 2050 or 4-5 C by 2050. The massive temperature rise in the second scenario would be necessary to restore the massive energy imbalance caused by arctic amplification. Beyond that temperatures could level off if we stabilize CO2 emissions at 450 ppm and have other methods to stabilize methane deposits.

 

[skierinvermont]

That Roger Jones chart has mega-bust written all over it... That shows a dramatic warming over the next 5-10 years.

 

I never understand why any of these charts show LONG term peaks and valleys, this should never be presented in a non-smoothed format.

 

It is the raw output of one simulation from one climate model. Why should it be smoothed? 

Smoothing it conceals the natural variability simulated by the model. Which is exactly what deniers complain about. Deniers do this all the time. They like to ignore natural variability in climate science and then criticize climate science for not showing natural variability. 

[skierinvermont]

It's probably better not to publish specific temperature forecasts beyond 5 years since the scientists that do

leave themselves open to criticism if they don't verify. A simple statement like we know that increasing carbon 

emissions will cause the earth to warm over the long term but we just aren't sure of the magnitude yet would

suffice. People respect it when scientists admit uncertainty.

 

It will be interesting the see the 2014 update coming from the Met Office in a few days.

 

2013 forecast

 

fcst_global_t4.png

 

Fortunately, it's exceptionally rare for climate scientists to issue temperature predictions. They issue projections, which are of great scientific, economic, and policy value. Projections can be used, by NOAA for example, to simulate fish populations over coming decades and how policy might need to evolve to maintain fisheries. For example, how do they fare in RCP4.5 vs RCP8.5 and how would catch limits need to differ between the two?

[The_Global_Warmer]

The arctic is progged to be 3.3C above normal for the next 8 day by the 12z GFS.  This includes part of the Russian cold spell but not the US cold spells.

 

 

 

 

 

I wish we had free access to these maps on a global level.

 

 

[bluewave]

Fortunately, it's exceptionally rare for climate scientists to issue temperature predictions. They issue projections, which are of great scientific, economic, and policy value. Projections can be used, by NOAA for example, to simulate fish populations over coming decades and how policy might need to evolve to maintain fisheries. For example, how do they fare in RCP4.5 vs RCP8.5 and how would catch limits need to differ between the two?

 

The recent projections were too high which will probably make people doubt any future projections.

But hopefully the models that take the PDO into account will have a better track record going forward.

They are only running the new HADGEM3 out to five years and the new CCSM model at NCAR

had a slower rate of warming of around +1.4C over the next hundred years when hiatus periods

were factored in with the PDO. The bottom line is there is quite a bit of uncertainty in long range

temperature forecasts.

 

 

The time series of globally averaged surface temperature from  all five climate-model simulations show some decades with little or no positive trend (Fig. 1a), as has occurred in observations  (Supplementary Fig. S1 top). Running ten year linear trends of globally averaged surface temperature from the five model ensemble  members reveal hiatus periods (Fig. 1a) comparable to observations  (Supplementary Fig. S1 middle). Using the first ensemble member as an example, the overall warming averaged over the century is about +0.15 ◦ C per decade. However, the decades centred around  2020, 2054, 2065, 2070, and several decades late in the century  show either near zero or slightly negative trends in that ensemble  member. We choose two ten year periods in this ensemble member when the globally averaged surface temperature is negative, that is, less than −0.10 ◦ C over the decade (Fig. 1a), and six similar  periods that meet the same criterion from the other four ensemble  members, to form an eight-member composite of hiatus periods.

 

http://www.scienceda...10918144941.htm

 

 

To track where the heat was going, Meehl and colleagues used a powerful software tool known as the Community Climate System Model, which was developed by scientists at NCAR and the Department of Energy with colleagues at other organizations. Using the model's ability to portray complex interactions between the atmosphere, land, oceans, and sea ice, they performed five simulations of global temperatures.

The simulations, which were based on projections of future greenhouse gas emissions from human activities, indicated that temperatures would rise by several degrees during this century. But each simulation also showed periods in which temperatures would stabilize for about a decade before climbing again. For example, one simulation showed the global average rising by about 2.5 degrees Fahrenheit (1.4 degrees Celsius) between 2000 and 2100, but with two decade-long hiatus periods during the century.

 

 

 

[skierinvermont]

Unless you have a crystal ball (and human emissions actually do follow one of the emission pathways), how do you know that recent projections were too high?

 

Also, the inclusion of the PDO really should not have much effect on a 90 year projection. If the inclusion of the PDO makes a big difference in the end result, there's probably something wrong with the model. You still don't seem to fully understand that by causing a "hiatus" decade in surface warming, a -PDO enlarges the surface energy imbalance and only guarantees faster warming in future decades. 

 

Most CMIP5 models already include the PDO anyways. And I believe the AR4 models did too.

 

What was new in recent years was the tuning of the PDO to the present PDO state which allowed for better short-term prediction but should have little bearing on long-term projection.

[ORH_wxman]

I'm in agreement with the idea that most GCMs underestimate the magnitude/depth of the primary oceanic mixing layer..however I'm looking at this on a 50-100yr scale. I could care less about short, decadal length hiatus periods, or accelerations for that matter, because with a slower TCR, you'd expect them to occur. A slower TCR at this point would suggest a higher climate sensitivity than a rapid TCR. Climate sensitivity is what I care about.

I think the current "hiatus" in warming is being given too much attention, especially because it gives skeptics hallucinatory ammo. If the hiatus continues for another 10 years or temps begin to cool, then we can talk.

 

 

Well that explains your view then.

 

 

Most agencies like IPCC care more about TCR since that is what policy is based off of. That is why we see all the projections out to 2100 and 2050...since that is what makes climate change most dangerous. If it happens rapidly. If we have to wait another 500-1,000 years for an extra degree celsius (or two in higher scenarios) to manifest itself at the surface, then that is a big deal compared to having it occur by 2100.

[AvantHiatus]

Have fun trying to debunk this article from SkepticalScience.

http://skepticalscience.com/Its_all_a_Question_of_Balance.html

 

 

 

The Earth is warming, accumulating heat. As has been discussed recently this extra heat is building up at a rate of around 250 trillion Watts (Joules per second). Recently Skeptical Science’s Bob Lacatena published his Heat Widget highlighting that this heat build-up is the equivalent of adding the energy of 4 Hiroshima bombs per second to the Earth (or 1.8 Hurricane Sandy’s per second or 4 magnitude 6 earthquakes per second). You can see it ticking away in the sidebar on the right.

[ORH_wxman]

 

Have fun trying to debunk this article from SkepticalScience.

http://skepticalscience.com/Its_all_a_Question_of_Balance.html

 

That article just explains what energy balance is...and uses a lot of hyperbole to make it scary sounding in the event that the earth gets out of whack by some arbitrary amount that isn't realistic. In short, it doesn't tell us anything very useful beyond how an energy budget works.

[The_Global_Warmer]

There does appear to be some huge cold coming to part of Eurasia and NA that will help off-set this in the short term on the global anomalies. 

 

 

But it isn't good to see so much mid lattitude warming.  I think we are at .30C+ on the next weekly update. 

[The_Global_Warmer]

Between the SSTA exploding upwards and the progged arctic anomalys.  I am not sure if the mid latitude cold that will have as big of an impact in the up coming weeks. 

 

CFS is holding around .12 to .14C today. 

 

Edit at the 18z update it went down slightly below .10C. 

 

 

While ssta have a lag to TLT's.  They don't in terms of surface temps.  If the SSTA is .15C+  Essentially that is the surface temp anomaly of the ocean.  Since land can get so much hotter and colder it clearly has a bigger short term impact.

 

 

 

 

[The_Global_Warmer]

Good God.

 

This is quickly becoming utterly ridiculous. 

 

[Jonger]

I'm not trying to be biased here, but the last 5 times you posted that... I can't see the difference.

[AvantHiatus]

I'm not trying to be biased here, but the last 5 times you posted that... I can't see the difference.

It requires a keen eye to distinguish changes in SSTA on a day-to-day basis, however it's a bit easier because they are changing much faster than usual. The vast majority of warming has occurred in the southern hemisphere.

 

[StudentOfClimatology]

The NOAA-NESDIS data has revealed a significant warming of southern hemispheric SSTs. However, the anomaly is still less than it was during September-November.

[Jonger]

It requires a keen eye to distinguish changes in SSTA on a day-to-day basis, however it's a bit easier because they are changing much faster than usual. The vast majority of warming has occurred in the southern hemisphere.

 

gickr.com_cf2e3564-ef30-0324-a1a3-d0877286aaaa.gif

 

It looks like the 17th was the warmest map...

[The_Global_Warmer]

It looks like the 17th was the warmest map...

 

It's not even close.  You are so full of it.

 

[nflwxman]

It's not even close.  You are so full of it.

 

I can see how it could be hard with the previous juxtaposition to tell exactly the magnitude of change.  This one is quite a bit clearer.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Going to be a hell of a cold spell for the continents.  Expecially Eurasia while the arctic torches hard.

 

 

[The_Global_Warmer]

I can see how it could be hard with the previous juxtaposition to tell exactly the magnitude of change.  This one is quite a bit clearer.

 

I would definitely give the benifit of the doubt if it wasn't jonger sad to say.

 

 

The biggest difference that also has to be accounted for is the Indian ocean.  Which is decievingly large on these maps because of it's latitude. That is a huge warmup there.  Between South of Africa and Australia warm anomalys have increased a lot.  With the cool in the middle slightly cooler.

 

The cool SE of Australia has also cooled every so slightly.  There are new cooler anomalies in small ssections over the West pacific.  But East of there neading East into the Central NPAC a huge area has warmed.  South of there in ENSO 3-4 huge warming has also taken place. 

 

The concentrated warmth over the SPAC has expanded a lot.  Enough to cause big warming there as well.

 

The South Atlantic has clearly warmed a lot.  While SW of there as warmed slightly over cool anomalies. 

 

Even the smaller seas between Africa and Euro has warmed.  The NEPAC has cooled but not that much.  The band of cool ESE of Japan has also warmed a little bit. The NATL looks slightly cooler. 

 

 

Overall this is a huge warmup. Below is the SH SSTA with the last update centered on the week of Jan 15th.  Basically that weekly update is the average of the 13th-19th of January.

 

The next weekly update coming out Monday morning will be for the period of the 20th-26th.

 

As you can see this is a normal warmup.  Some years are stronger than others. 

 

As of now I expect the SH SSTA to jump to about .35C+ on the next update.

 

The second graphic is the NH SSTA.  Which was about .23C+ last week.  I expect it to warm slightly as well because of that large stretch of warming between 0-20N over the Pacific.

 

So the last time we had SSTA up at .30C+ in January was during 2010 NINO.  The ONI for DJF was 1.6C, 1.6C, 1.3C.

 

The ONI last update was -0.3C. 

 

 

display plot oiv2.ctl ssta 1 03jan2012 to 15jan2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

[The_Global_Warmer]

Global ssta only warmed a tiny bit from the week before.  I do want to correct something I said.

 

 I said the ssta were centered around the ended date.  But I was wrong the 22nd is the last date in the set.  The weeklies are updated on Monday mornings with data up to the previous Wednesday. 

 

This doesn't mean that I haven't over estimated the warming.  But that the weeklies are for the 16th-22nd.  As you guys can see from our postings the warming took off in earnest around the 20th.  While the NPAC cooling leveled off around the 22nd-23rd.

 

ENSO also warmed up a lot from the 20th-24th.  But the last two days the 25th and 26th.  It's slightly cooler again out in the central Pacific.

 

The Southern Hemisphere has continued it's warming.  It's quite impressive.

 

I posted the time series and weekly graphic below.  Below that is ENSO.  Which was a bit warmer than the week before.  But still quite the cool off. 

 

The SH warmed up quite a bit.  But it's probably going to jump more than it did on this update next week.  The NH cooled off a bit from the NPAC cooling down. 

 

 

I think the biggest

 

 

 

 

display plot oiv2.ctl ssta 1 03jan2013 to 22jan2014