Posted on 05/08/2010 10:08:51 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Recent Variations In Upper Ocean Heat Content – Information From Phil Klotzbach
By Dr. Roger Pielke Senior
Phil Klotzbach has graciously permitted me to post an update on upper ocean heat content in the equatorial upper ocean. He writes
“The Climate Prediction Center recently released its equatorial upper ocean heat content for April 2010. One of the primary areas that they focus on is the equatorial heat content averaged over the area from 180-100W. The decrease in upper ocean heat content from March to April was 1C, which is the largest decrease in equatorial upper ocean heat content in this area since the CPC began keeping records of this in 1979. The upwelling phase of a Kelvin wave was likely somewhat responsible for this significant cooling. It seems like just about every statistical and dynamical model is calling for ENSO to dissipate over the next month or two as well, so it’s probable that we will see a transition to neutral conditions shortly. I have attached a spreadsheet showing upper ocean heat content data from CPC since 1979. In case you’re interested, the correlation between April upper ocean heat content from 180-100W and August-October Nino 3.4 is an impressive 0.75 over the years from 1979-2009.
He has plotted the data below. An interesting question is to where this heat has gone.
It could have moved north and south in the upper ocean, however, to the extent the sea surface temperature anomalies map to the upper ocean heat content, there is no evidence of large heat transfers except, perhaps, in the tropical Atlantic [see].
The heat could have been transferred deeper into the ocean. However, if this is true, this heat would have been seen moving to lower levels, but, so far, there is no evidence of such a large vertical heat transfer.
The heat could, of course, be lost to space. This appears to be the most likely explanation.
Looking at "global" temperatures on an annual scale seems to be too low of a resolution to describe "climate" to me. I want to know the future of the Winter months more than those of Spring and Fall.
“Profiling the ocean is more important than profiling “terrorists”...right?”
Profiling the ocean might be important because it puts the lie to algore, the GW Terrorist - so this, you see, does both :)
bttt
There is a product called Solar Pill that coats the top of swimming pool water and supposedly helps the water retain warmth.
I asked the owner of our pool store and she said it worked, but a dome works better. We have a vinyl dome over our above-ground and she added that the Solar Pill would not give us any additional heat.
The thing contains a fluid that *coats* the water. It is placed in the skimmer.
i suspect different fluids will have different results. I can’t believe the question even popped into my head.
Will have to see how the summer sun warms it up. Solar activity is up and down like a yo yo, but still not getting active enough to cause overall warming. No summer for many.
Then again. The wording could mean a composite global sea surface anomaly. I’m confused at the moment. Must re-read the whole article to try to figure out if it is a given ocean’s measurements or the total means of all the oceans. This stuff can wreck one’s mind at times.
Looking at the map at post #26....posted by justa-hairyape
I would say that blue area just off the west coast of South America is the upwelling cold area....but from the spreadsheet where does the E meaning East come in?...
Referring to the heading:
Equatorial Heat Content (average temperature in the upper 300 meters deg C) 130E-80W
Back to the ballgame...
Sea Surface Temperature Anomaly Image Animation (45N-45S)
over the past six months
Which only goes to show you that man-made global warming is real. :=) (At least, I'm sure that's what Al Gore would tellyou.)
Equatorial Pacific 130 E of Greenwich is where Indonesia and New Guinea meet. 80 W of Greenwich is near Ecuador. Basically the Big Equatorial Band of the Pacific. They have more or less been ignoring the cold North Pacific shallow waters all Winter. They are located north of the El Nino/La Nina equatorial region. Shallow waters directly affect precipitation. The colder waters they are referring to in this article are located below shallow water or in the deeper region of shallow water. That cold is rising up to replace the warmth. Perhaps that is the end cycle of Ocean Heat Loss. Trade winds stop. Ocean currents no longer store shallow radiative heat into deep basins. That heat is given off back into the atmosphere. Then eventually the lack of warmer water going into the deep basins causes a cold upwelling. Basically, the oceans just lost a ton of heat. Next winter should be very, very cold. Bitter cold. Unless of course the sun can stay cranked up for a long time. But winter is already just about set in. How did those idiots refer to it ? Oh yeah. Its in the pipe line, dude.
The Unisys data uses the color green between blue and yellow. The reason NASA does not is because they have to act like clowns apparently to get funding. NASA plots always look warmer then they actually are. They use every trick in the book and then some. But basically, except for a small band near the Equator, the entire North Pacific is Cold. A few areas very cold. But NASA has all its eggs in the narrow El Nino basket, so who cares about the PDO.
Sorry about that. NASA should read NOAA.
Hotness is in the eye of the beholder
******************************EXCERPT********************************
I’ve mentioned before how chosen color schemes greatly influence how people see surface temperature data. Frank points out that sea surface temperature presentations suffer from the same problem. – Anthony
Guest post by Frank Lansner
This is no news – but still needs to be told. NOAA can in many contexts come up with the hottest temperatures available. Here we take a look at the European Sea Surface Temperatures as of 3 may 2010.
NOAA vs. UNISYS, SST, Europe. When I look at this compare, again and again I have to check if these SST are from the very same date, 3 may 2010. But they are. Differences are immense to an extend where it hardly makes sense to look after the European SST?
NOAA is hotter than UNISYS in for example these waters:
The Baltic Sea, The North Sea, The Caspian Sea,
And in addition,
The Black Sea has NOAA Approx. 3,5 K warmer than UNISYS, and
“The NOAA hotspot area” North of Scandinavia: NOAA Approx. 4 – 6 K warmer than UNISYS .
Is there a valid sound simple explanation for these great differences?
In addition NOAA uses a colour scheme that makes Europe look as if surrounded by burning lava. It’s quite a difference to the impression you get when looking at the UNISYS graphic.
So which graphic is correct? For the Baltic, here’s what the “jury” says, SMHI (From Sweden) has an updated SST for the Baltic Sea from exactly 3 may 2010:
The 3 graphics agree reasonably for the Northern Baltic Sea, but for the rest of the Baltic Sea, SMHI shows in average around – 1,5 degrees Celsius anomaly. Both UNISYS and NOAA show too warm temperatures, but NOAA far worse than UNISYS. So, NOAA is around 2 K warmer in this area than SMHI – the best estimate.
Europe is not the only area where NOAA has warmer temperatures than UNISYS. NOAA appears markedly warmer than UNISYS on the Northern Hemisphere – but a little colder than UNISYS in areas of the Southern Hemisphere:
Agree in full. Blue/green representation of temp gradients verse red/yellow. Along with all else you had to say. Clowns need funding. And guys like Hansen must have their dream of killing off millions of people in the cause to save humanity.
 |
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe · | ||
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
