Posted on 02/16/2014 10:15:55 AM PST by Redcloak
Chicago (AFP) - A warmer Arctic could permanently affect the pattern of the high-altitude polar jet stream, resulting in longer and colder winters over North America and northern Europe, US scientists say.
The jet stream, a ribbon of high altitude, high-speed wind in northern latitudes that blows from west to east, is formed when the cold Arctic air clashes with warmer air from further south.
The greater the difference in temperature, the faster the jet stream moves.
According to Jennifer Francis, a climate expert at Rutgers University, the Arctic air has warmed in recent years as a result of melting polar ice caps, meaning there is now less of a difference in temperatures when it hits air from lower latitudes.
"The jet stream is a very fast moving river of air over our head," she said Saturday at a meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
"But over the past two decades the jet stream has weakened. This is something we can measure," she said.
As a result, instead of circling the earth in the far north, the jet stream has begun to meander, like a river heading off course.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
So how could melting ice caps be the driving force in warmer air?
Methinks there is a cart pulling a horse somewhere in this scenario.
If the ice caps are melting, then perhaps something else is to blame, but AFAIK, the ice caps were there, happy and healthy this year (perhaps submarine volcanic activity in the Arctic Ocean slacked off).
We are entering a new dark age where what once was reasoned science has become dogma and superstition to the point that reasoning is being dumped on its head.
1a) Two decades is meaningless, 1b) The jet stream has weakened only because it strengthened in the 90's: http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/pna/nao.timeseries.gif 2) the warming in the Arctic in winter is the result of the weaker (meandering) jet stream, not the cause 3) Francis is a stupid propagandist.
Yes the southern hemisphere has a polar jet, but it is a lot less wavy due to having no irregular land masses like the northern.
I guess the question is one of whether enough energy has been removed from the normal air currents on the planet (via windfarms converting it to mechanical, then electrical energy) to interfere with the normal operation of the jet stream. If so, the greenies could bring on the next ice age...
That is reflected, not radiated, but your point is valid. Also to the same point a warmer Arctic due to the wavy jet causes more heat to be radiated in winter which also results in global cooling.
Yes, but one year doesn't change the long term downtrend of Arctic ice. It hardly matters since we are talking about ice cover in summer, not in winter when the jet waviness matters.
Because it is orders of magnitude less than the heat from the sun
It’s got to be variable.
Not as variable as the sun.
It more than core, wy. On a comparable scale, the crust thickness would be the paint thickness covering a grapefruit. Everything below that paint is molten.
The only source of weather on the earth is the sun. The sun simply doesn't shine on the poles in the winter. This means the poles get cold in the winter. The cold is like a beret' on your head. Sometimes it isn't placed directly on the top, so some parts get colder than normal, while other spots get warmer than normal. It's as simple as that.
The other thing to remember is that warm air (think equator) rises, and cold air sinks. This means warm air at the equator tends to move to the poles. The problem is that the equator, and the air around it, is moving from west to east at about 1000 miles per hour. The poles barely move at all. This makes for jet streams as the air moves to the poles. (Note how they move generally from west to east.)
Weather patterns can alter these things, somewhat, but nothing can alter these facts: The poles are cold in the winter, air flows from hot to cold, and the equator moves at about 1000 mph. Don't let a jaunty beret' convince you otherwise. Give nothing but mirth, or pity, to the warmists.
I guess the question is one of whether enough energy has been removed from the normal air currents on the planet (via windfarms converting it to mechanical, then electrical energy) to interfere with the normal operation of the jet stream. If so, the greenies could bring on the next ice age...
Another of those, “sounds good until your think about it.”
True, but they release it each year when the ice refreezes. Look at various years in this plot http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php and you will see generally more warmth than average in the fall and less in the spring. The spring cooling is the absorption of heat as you point out. The fall warmth is from the refreeze.
I’ll have to get back with you after I check out the math.
My problem with these kind of articles is that if we are to take the “scientists” as credible, then they should have predicted this sort of model 10 years ago. They just keep modifying the theory to fit the latest weather patterns.
Doubtful since wind energy production is 10^21 Joules which is 10 times less than a day of sunshine. Considering that a lot of wind results from that sunshine, I don't think there is any effect.
Scientific American, Nuclear Fission Confirmed as Source of More than Half of Earth’s Heat
Excerpt: "The new measurements suggest radioactive decay provides more than half of Earth’s total heat, estimated at roughly 44 terawatts based on temperatures found at the bottom of deep boreholes into the planet’s crust. The rest is leftover from Earth’s formation or other causes yet unknown, according to the scientists involved. Some of that heat may have been trapped in Earth’s molten iron core since the planet’s formation, while the nuclear decay happens primarily in the crust and mantle"
According to Al Gore, the interior of the planet is hot — millions of degrees hot!
44 TW for one day is 4x10^18 J. The sun hits us with 10^22 Joules each day (just looked it above).
I always found it fascinating how the jet stream pulled arctic air south to make where I live, (MN) a living polar Hell. If you look at temp averages we’re colder than most of Scandinavia and seem more like Siberia, yet we’re a much lower latitude.
If you call -40 “warmth”...
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.
