Global Average Temperature 2024

[Brewbeer]

Imagine weenieing data as if data were an opinion

[LibertyBell]

6 hours ago, Brewbeer said:

Imagine weenieing data as if data were an opinion

That "account" (and I use that term VERY loosely) is definitely sig worthy lol

[chubbs]

This nino continues to have atypical timing. Global temperature anomalies have plateaued since September, instead of continuing to rise into a typical Feb/March peak. Don't think a record is a slam dunk this year. Will depend on how fast and far the decay is as nino----> nina.

Also note the warming since 2014, roughly 0.8C, or 10-20% of an ice age. An unusual decade. That may help explain why there is much more discussion of where our winters are headed vs 10 years ago.

[TheClimateChanger]

 

[TheClimateChanger]

Warmest February on record in UAH at +0.93C. Also ties October 2023 for highest anomaly of any month.

https://www.drroyspencer.com

[bluewave]

7 minutes ago, TheClimateChanger said:

Warmest February on record in UAH at +0.93C. Also ties October 2023 for highest anomaly of any month.

https://www.drroyspencer.com

Very impressive warmth. 
 

 

 

[chubbs]

13 minutes ago, TheClimateChanger said:

Warmest February on record in UAH at +0.93C. Also ties October 2023 for highest anomaly of any month.

https://www.drroyspencer.com

This nino is having an unusually large impact on UAH. The red 13-month average will continue to rise for several months as cool months come off. Clear now that the period after the 2016 nino is different in UAH than the period after the 1998 nino. I see 2 explanations: 1) we have better satellites now that are not impacted by diurnal drift, or 2) The urban heat island is starting to impact satellite measurements

 

[SnoSki14]

18 minutes ago, bluewave said:

Very impressive warmth. 
 

 

 

Scary summer coming up. The warmth is already off the charts. We're accelerating now

[chubbs]

1 hour ago, bluewave said:

Very impressive warmth. 
 

 

 

In January ERA broke the record by 0.15C, while GISS only broke by 0.03C, Berkeley Earth by 0.05C and NOAA by 0.07C. ERA broke the February record by 0.12C, a little lower than Jan. We'll see how the obs come in Feb, probably another record month across the board but not guaranteed.

[bluewave]

6 minutes ago, chubbs said:

In January ERA broke the record by 0.15C, while GISS only broke by 0.03C, Berkeley Earth by 0.05C and NOAA by 0.07C. ERA broke the February record by 0.12C, a little lower than Jan. We'll see how the obs come in Feb, probably another record month across the board but not guaranteed.

It would be interesting find out why the timing and magnitude of the warmth with this El Niño was so different from past events. 
 

 

[chubbs]

From Gavin Schmidt's twitter. Net radiation is coming down as atmosphere warming due to the nino increases radiation to space. The decrease in the past year isn't small enough though to put much of a dent in the decade-long increase.

[bdgwx]

From the latest CERES data we can see that Earth's albedo has dropped from 0.293 in 2003 to 0.288 in 2023. That is a radiative feedback of 340 W/m2 * (0.293-0.288) = +1.7 W/m2. 

For the lurkers...notice that I called it a radiative feedback and not a radiative force. The reason is because this a feedback response to global warming. See [Donohoe et al. 2014] for a more intuitive explanation of what is happening.

[bluewave]

In general, the 2023 temperature anomaly has come out of the blue, revealing an unprecedented knowledge gap perhaps for the first time since about 40 years ago, when satellite data began offering modellers an unparalleled, real-time view of Earth’s climate system. If the anomaly does not stabilize by August — a reasonable expectation based on previous El Niño events — then the world will be in uncharted territory. It could imply that a warming planet is already fundamentally altering how the climate system operates, much sooner than scientists had anticipated. It could also mean that statistical inferences based on past events are less reliable than we thought, adding more uncertainty to seasonal predictions of droughts and rainfall patterns.

Much of the world’s climate is driven by intricate, long-distance links — known as teleconnections — fuelled by sea and atmospheric currents. If their behaviour is in flux or markedly diverging from previous observations, we need to know about such changes in real time. We need answers for why 2023 turned out to be the warmest year in possibly the past 100,000 years. And we need them quickly.

Nature 627, 467 (2024)

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00816-z

 

[Typhoon Tip]

I was musing to self last week ... maybe the ending of the over-lapsing solar cycle minimum, nearing its end, might have some at least partial factorization in this.  

The solar mins are defined as period of decreased solar activity - less than the longer term average number of sunspot behavior.  That also includes lowering(increasing) numbers of SFs and CME activity, depending on min or max, respectively.

In addition, solar cycles effect the average brightness of the sun, which directly raises or lowers the energy to the Terran surfaces - as much as 1 watt/sqr-metter; this variation when all told after absorption by the total Earth system, ends up adjusting the temperature up or down by as much as 0.1 degrees C.

So, I'm wonder the following:

In 2005, the impending solar minimum warned as being a super-position along two temporal variances, the 11-year, and a longer period 22-year periods. The collocation of these period oscillations at the time lent to the educated assumption, an unusually quiet period was imminent, the character of which meant minimums, over the course of ensuing 15 to 20 years, would be of greater negative magnitude than any intervening maximums intervals within.  What is also interesting is that the planetary temperatures have risen straight through these lasts 15 to 20 years, despite the 'educated assumption.'  In other words, what happened to our -0.1 C offset?

The thing is, 0.1 C isn't a terribly large number, but... if it were being suppressed by a more dominant global warming signal, that could account for that.   But now, suppose there was a "synergistic" effect, due to several non-competing factors that suddenly came into existence nearing the spring of 2023?

Basically when you superimpose, in time, favorable disparate forces, the outcome can be more, sometimes much more, than the sum of the individual forces...etc... One source being the implied increase in the total irradiance uptake nearing the end of the solar min ( I haven't seen any calculation/papers on that specifically ... bear with the speculation here ). 

The other perhaps being, there are numerous articles ( paraphrasing papers on publishing sources like phys.org etc ) that outlined secondary and tertiary  possible +thermal responses directly or indirectly Tonga eruption related.

Poor timing perhaps in having that event coincide with even a subtle uptick in the solar flux; even though this latter aspect is small,  dumping more energy into a 'prone system,' one that is repeatedly demonstrating it will warm up with lesser physically exerted excuses to do so?  Such that then combining ...  may not end so well.  

This could be a cocktail of positive feedbacks contributing to a synergistic global thermal response. 

Which, I'm sure physicists that skulk around the web for ideas that they, with the wherewithal to investigate far more readily, ...will publish a paper that does not credit the source for their inspired idea LOL ... kidding.   But one way or the other, I would not be surprised if something of a publication surfaces soon that begins to connect a synergistic/superposition hypothesis in why the world witness that global heat burst last year.

The thing that is peculiar to me is the oceanic SST aspect of that last March-May abrupt warming event.  It wasn't just the tropical Pacific ENSO ... the AMO and the PDO and southern hemisphere oceanic basins ... well away from the tropics, also simultaneously warmed.  Which is why - in part - I enter that solar variance is a plausible, at least partial factor there.

You know, what ended the Cretaceous era and the mass extinction that occurred along that boundary is largely attributed to a large asteroid or comet impact. However, as paleo biology will point out, the system was becoming unstable for them prior to the advent of that rather enormous straw on the camel's back. The idea of setting up the Earth systems with proneness, then having poor timing in multiple factors arrive to bring the house down ... that is not unprecedented.  Science has exposed other mass extinction events also having multiple overlapping aspects taking place, where back-ground adaptation rates where exceeded by the deleterious assaults in multitude.  Whether we want to believe that human activity plays any particularly crucial role in setting that table this time or not, that is not coming under the microscope in this op ed.  I'm just wondering - in general - if we are bearing witness in real time, of another overlapping.  We are, as already defined by empirical data, living ... or perhaps more so than we are even cognitively aware, "surviving" a mass extinction event.

Creepy to suggest ... but perhaps all this is already academic.

[chubbs]

Think the Gavin S and other experts are underestimating the effect of this nino. The timing fits a nino response but with  faster onset and a larger overall warming than we have seen in the satellite era. Those features can be explained by the rapid warming in the east Pacific last spring. Global SST have peaked and are starting to fall. We'll see if this nino has a lasting impact on SST like the 15/16 nino.

[Typhoon Tip]

On 3/3/2024 at 7:29 AM, TheClimateChanger said:

 

It’s one of those uneasy laughter moments…

[bluewave]

My guess is that this warming spike is related to the rapid subtropical SST warming which has occurred since the last super El Niño in 15-16. 
 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-023-00839-w

In this study, we evaluate the ocean warming pattern derived from four decades of satellite measurements. We find widespread strong subtropical ocean warming, concentrating mostly on the western ocean basins. In contrast to these observations, studies of paleoclimate suggest that the greatest ocean warming occurs at higher latitudes. By pairing the observed warming pattern with SST evolution in long-term climate simulations, we propose that the observed warming pattern is constrained by ocean dynamics of surface convergence (downwelling, subtropical gyres) and divergence (upwelling, subpolar gyres) rather than being dominated by internal variabilities, such as the PDO. This pattern emerges only at the early stage (a few decades) of anthropogenic warming when absorption of heat concentrates in the upper ocean. On centennial (for the Northern Pacific Ocean) to millennial (for the North Atlantic Ocean and Southern Hemisphere) timescales, when deep ocean water warms, the greatest ocean warming is expected to occur in the subpolar region, as indicated by paleo-reconstructions and the long-term and equilibrium climate simulations.

 

 

 

[Typhoon Tip]

33 minutes ago, chubbs said:

Think the Gavin S and other experts are underestimating the effect of this nino. The timing fits a nino response but with  faster onset and a larger overall warming than we have seen in the satellite era. Those features can be explained by the rapid warming in the east Pacific last spring. Global SST have peaked and are starting to fall. We'll see if this nino has a lasting impact on SST like the 15/16 nino.

I think the distinction that global SSTs have "peaked and are starting to fall" isn't very well supported if one is using the graph above.  Looking back along the character of that curve, it is highly 'serrated' with interim periods that were both increasing(decreasing) but quickly resumed the previous dynamic.

I don't disagree with what you were saying, overall ... just speaking to that point, specifically.  We need more time to determine if that descent qualifies as that.

[Typhoon Tip]

6 minutes ago, bluewave said:

My guess is that this warming spike is related to the rapid subtropical SST warming which has occurred since the last super El Niño in 15-16. 
 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-023-00839-w

In this study, we evaluate the ocean warming pattern derived from four decades of satellite measurements. We find widespread strong subtropical ocean warming, concentrating mostly on the western ocean basins. In contrast to these observations, studies of paleoclimate suggest that the greatest ocean warming occurs at higher latitudes. By pairing the observed warming pattern with SST evolution in long-term climate simulations, we propose that the observed warming pattern is constrained by ocean dynamics of surface convergence (downwelling, subtropical gyres) and divergence (upwelling, subpolar gyres) rather than being dominated by internal variabilities, such as the PDO. This pattern emerges only at the early stage (a few decades) of anthropogenic warming when absorption of heat concentrates in the upper ocean. On centennial (for the Northern Pacific Ocean) to millennial (for the North Atlantic Ocean and Southern Hemisphere) timescales, when deep ocean water warms, the greatest ocean warming is expected to occur in the subpolar region, as indicated by paleo-reconstructions and the long-term and equilibrium climate simulations.

 

 

 

Nah... not to sound dismissive (ha)  really but that doesn't explain why both air and sea from pole to pole unilaterally increased prior to the onset of the warm ENSO phase.

[chubbs]

1 hour ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Nah... not to sound dismissive (ha)  really but that doesn't explain why both air and sea from pole to pole unilaterally increased prior to the onset of the warm ENSO phase.

Related to the point I made above. Nino34 wasn't a good metric for this nino. Nino12+3 warmed fast and early, leading nino34, and triggering the global SST rise. Of course other factors played a role. The large radiation imbalance during the nina years warmed the subsurface, which primed the pump.

[bluewave]

4 hours ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Nah... not to sound dismissive (ha)  really but that doesn't explain why both air and sea from pole to pole unilaterally increased prior to the onset of the warm ENSO phase.

The timing of the jump in temperatures this year was related to the onset of the El Niño. But the magnitude of warmth was a function of the record heat being released from the oceans. Much more heat available this El Niño than previous ones. So even a significantly weaker El Niño than 2015-16 had more warming potential. But it will still take more research specifically as to why this lead to a sharper temperature increase earlier in the year than past El Niño events. 
 

 

 

 

 

[Typhoon Tip]

2 hours ago, bluewave said:

The timing of the jump in temperatures this year was related to the onset of the El Niño. But the magnitude of warmth was a function of the record heat being released from the oceans. Much more heat available this El Niño than previous ones. So even a significantly weaker El Niño than 2015-16 had more warming potential. But it will still take more research specifically as to why this lead to a sharper temperature increase earlier in the year than past El Niño events. 
 

 

 

 

 

It depends what is meant by "related" in the bold.

If by that it coincided - temporal - than sure. 

However, global temperature response should not occur in the same temporal frame - the atmosphere has a noted lag wrt to warm ENSO phase.  Last March, the air and sea well outside the ENSO district ...everywhere, bombed temp apace and faster than the onset;  that does not fit either statistics, nor baser understanding of geophysical "relationship" between air and sea -

Think of it this way, the El Nino has to couple to the atmosphere first - it was not coupled when the heat flash took place.  In fact, the flash took place when technically the La Nina was still on the charts ...in process of attenuation, but still observed.  The El Nino was in fact manifesting underneath and I would also proffer the reason the super Nino failed is probably because these outer modes were in some variant of destructive interference.

[bluewave]

35 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

It depends what is meant by "related" in the bold.

If by that it coincided - temporal - than sure. 

However, global temperature response should not occur in the same temporal frame - the atmosphere has a noted lag wrt to warm ENSO phase.  Last March, the air and sea well outside the ENSO district ...everywhere, bombed temp apace and faster than the onset;  that does not fit either statistics, nor baser understanding of geophysical "relationship" between air and sea -

Think of it this way, the El Nino has to couple to the atmosphere first - it was not coupled when the heat flash took place.  In fact, the flash took place when technically the La Nina was still on the charts ...in process of attenuation, but still observed.  The El Nino was in fact manifesting underneath and I would also proffer the reason the super Nino failed is probably because these outer modes were in some variant of destructive interference.

Maybe such an extreme SST rise leading into the El Niño altered the usual timing of the global temperature response surrounding this event. 
 

 

[chubbs]

A number of relatively small items are aiding warming. We are near the peak of a solar cycle that is stronger than the last cycle (see chart below). Haven't seen a definitive accounting but the Hunga Tonga volcano is likely a small plus warming factor. Finally man-made forcing is increasing at a faster rate in the past 10 years as aerosol emissions come down due to air pollution control..

[Typhoon Tip]

1 hour ago, bluewave said:

Maybe such an extreme SST rise leading into the El Niño altered the usual timing of the global temperature response surrounding this event. 
 

 

Yeah, something like this sure. 

Last year was a clinic on how the systems are multifactor guided 

[Typhoon Tip]

24 minutes ago, chubbs said:

A number of relatively small items are aiding warming. We are near the peak of a solar cycle that is stronger than the last cycle (see chart below). Haven't seen a definitive accounting but the Hunga Tonga volcano is likely a small plus warming factor. Finally man-made forcing is increasing at a faster rate in the past 10 years as aerosol emissions come down due to air pollution control..

Yeah, I wrote a longer op at above, in which I spoke of synergism in total manifold. A cocktail of non-competing, constructively interfering forces is a plausibility that I definitely endorse.

[csnavywx]

On 2/25/2024 at 7:09 PM, Brewbeer said:

Imagine weenieing data as if data were an opinion

I think we all know who's sock that is by now and it's because they don't think the data is real.

When a good scientist gets new data, they change their opinion.

When most people get new data, they change the data.

[chubbs]

We are approaching 1.5C of warming, when climate change impacts ramp, and the global warming rate has increased. Not a good place to be, and we have no excuse, it was well predicted.

 

[bluewave]

 

 

[rclab]

16 minutes ago, bluewave said:

 

 

Good afternoon BW. I was 18 when the original came out. Now at nearly 77 I come across this reworking of the lyrics with the same music. To me, as the latest deluge continues, I found it interesting and heart rending. Stay well, as always