Ocean warming

[Laurent]

Map Shows Vast Regions of Ocean Are Warmer (up to 2°C)
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=graphic-science-map-shows-vast-regions-ocean-warmer

[ananthapriya]

The oceans, scientists said, have had enough of the heat.

[Apocalypse4Real]

Something I found of interest is that the base SST table used to calculate El Nine-La Nina ENSO/ONI change/anomalies actually has an increase in the 30 year temperature base.

They are changing the methodology to recalculate the base every 5 years from the current 10 year period. The graphic of the change in the SST base is telling. The Historical ONI values by month are found at:

http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ensostuff/ensoyears.shtml

In other words, what we calculate as El Nino/La Nina or ENSO neutral isn't the same base as the past.

See: http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ensostuff/ONI_change.shtml

[Apocalypse4Real]

There is another perspective, the heating seen in the global temperature increase and the stored energy in the deep ocean.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=warming-ocean-threatens-sea-life

[BornFromTheVoid]

Another contributor to ocean warming discovered. It seems cyclones drive warmth into the ocean, which can be measure by the thermal expansion of the sea water after the storm has passed. This strongly influences the warming of tropical waters, and thus the trends in strength and number of the storms become very important.


Sea surface height evidence for long-term warming effects of tropical cyclones on the ocean

Tropical cyclones have been hypothesized to influence climate by pumping heat into the ocean, but a direct measure of this warming effect is still lacking. We quantified cyclone-induced ocean warming by directly monitoring the thermal expansion of water in the wake of cyclones, using satellite-based sea surface height data that provide a unique way of tracking the changes in ocean heat content on seasonal and longer timescales. We find that the long-term effect of cyclones is to warm the ocean at a rate of 0.32 ± 0.15 PW between 1993 and 2009, i.e., ∼23 times more efficiently per unit area than the background equatorial warming, making cyclones potentially important modulators of the climate by affecting heat transport in the ocean–atmosphere system. Furthermore, our analysis reveals that the rate of warming increases with cyclone intensity. This, together with a predicted shift in the distribution of cyclones toward higher intensities as climate warms, suggests the ocean will get even warmer, possibly leading to a positive feedback.

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2013/08/06/1306753110.abstract.html

[sidd]

Thanx for the reference to Mei(2013)

They find that Tropical Cyclone (TC) induced heat flux into the ocean is of the order of 1e22J/yr (twice the net 0-2000m OHC increase in Levitus(2012) doi:10.1029/2012GL051106 , or about 15% of total oceanic heat transport.

From Mei(2013)

"Recent studies (37–41) either predict or suggest that in the near future the frequency of intense TCs, particularly category-3 to -5 hurricanes, will increase in response to warming climate. This together with the extremely high efficiency of these intenseTCs at heating the ocean should accelerate the warming of the oceans, which in turn should feed back positively on TC activity. Furthermore, analyses of output from models participating in the fifth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (42) suggest that for most of the TC-active region, the ocean mixed layer gets shallower in the winter season whereas it changes little during the TC-active season under global warming (SI Appendix, SI Results). This projected change would allow more TC-pumped heat to persist in the permanent thermocline, potentially making the feedback between TC activity and ocean warming even stronger."

This leads me to Kidder and Worsley (2012) at
http://www.geosociety.org/gsatoday/archive/22/2/article/i1052-5173-22-2-4.htm

who describe climate evolving from Icehouse through Greenhouse into Hothouse states (and vice versa), with most heat transport to the poles in the Hothouse state being driven by large TC which might penetrate a kilometer into anoxic or euxinic ocean. Their earlier papers in 2004 and 2010 are also good, the references to these are in the GSA article. Mei(2013) seems consistent with the Kidder-Worsley picture.
 
I have attached the 0-2000m OHC rise in Levitus(2012) Fig 1 and Fig 2 from the Kidder-Worsley GSA article (which is open access) showing a comparison of {Ice,Green,Hot}house states.

[Phil]

Thanks sidd and all of the smart contributors collecting informations,  producing data processing and providing analysis here. ASIF is becoming a one stop place for all important matters. Citizen science on the move, so to said.
 

[ivica]

"What ocean heating reveals about global warming" by Stefan is new discussion at RealClimate, started today.

Highlights from there.
"The heat content of the oceans is growing and growing.  That means that the greenhouse effect has not taken a pause and the cold sun is not noticeably slowing global warming."

BTW: We have a small problem here i.e. this board/folder has similar topic (a few weeks younger) here: "NODC OHC reaches new records"

[ChrisReynolds]

Sidd,

Check out: Sexton 2011, "Eocene global warming events driven by ventilation of oceanic dissolved organic carbon" You'll find it as the top link in Google Scholar by searching for the title with a free copy at YIMG.

The issue the paper doesn't really address is how the ventilation happened to be orbitally paced, although the Southern Ocean is hinted at.

[wili]

As these and other news points out, warming (and acidification and anoxia) are far from the only threats to marine ecosystems:

http://www.desdemonadespair.net/2013/10/lionfish-infestation-in-atlantic-ocean.html

Lionfish infestation in Atlantic Ocean a growing epidemic – ‘The lionfish invasion is probably the worst environmental disaster the Atlantic will ever face’

The clear waters around Bermuda are as picturesque as you can imagine, and the brilliantly colored fish swimming around are like something from a crayon box. But a serious problem lurks behind the beautiful facade: the lionfish.

Lionfish are not native to the Atlantic Ocean. The venomous, fast reproducing fish are aggressive eaters and will consume anything and everything, gorging so much they are actually getting liver disease. With no known predators -- except human beings -- they can wipe out 90% of a reef.

"The lionfish invasion is probably the worst environmental disaster the Atlantic will ever face," said Graham Maddocks, president and founder of Ocean Support Foundation, which works with the government and research agencies to help reduce the lionfish population in Bermuda.

While the problem is only beginning to escalate, many in the marine preservation field are already concerned for the marine life that surrounds the lionfish.

http://www.desdemonadespair.net/2013/10/scientists-call-to-protect-british.html

Scientists call to protect British Columbia’s 9,000-year-old sponge reefs

http://www.desdemonadespair.net/2013/10/plastic-whale-project-illustrates-great.html

‘Plastic Whale Project’ illustrates Great Pacific Garbage Patch problem

[morganism]

Latest paper in Geophys gives some figures for energy estimates, and conclude deep ocean heating is the sink

http://www.climate-lab-book.ac.uk/2014/earths-energy-imbalance/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=earths-energy-imbalance


Allan, R., Liu, C., Loeb, N., Palmer, M., Roberts, M., Smith, D., & Vidale, P. (2014). Changes in global net radiative imbalance 1985-2012 Geophysical Research Letters DOI: 10.1002/2014GL060962

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/enhanced/doi/10.1002/2014GL060962/

[F.Tnioli]

Something I found of interest is that the base SST table used to calculate El Nine-La Nina ENSO/ONI change/anomalies actually has an increase in the 30 year temperature base.

They are changing the methodology to recalculate the base every 5 years from the current 10 year period. ...

I didn't read the whole topic, so please forgive me if this was already mentioned:

of course they do. Recalculating the base must be done, it's not in error, nor due to any agenda. La-nina and El-nino are defined as "unusually cold" and "unusually warm" periods of time, correspondedly (in terms of the surface of specific parts of the Pacific ocean). Within the climate system, it is exactly those "unusually cool pacific" and "unusually warm pacific" years - "unusually" in terms of exactly recent decade or two - which have a special significance, because of whole set of massive (and often - expensive to human economies) effects they bring. I mean droughts in certain locations around the globe, floods in others, heat waves, intensity of tropical hurricanes and such - total cost of "especially extreme" year (be it extremely strong La-Nina or El-Nino) is probably at least several hundreds billions dollars of direct and immediate damage, plus alot more in terms of lost ecological services, ruined ecosystems, logistic consequences of, say, destroyed road infrastructure for many years to come, etc etc.

It is important to understand all that and treat El-Nino and La-Nino terms (and events) for what they are (and not for more than that), yes. It is true that today's moderate La-Nina by absolute temperature of water masses in its heart - would be considered a weak (or even not so weak?) El-Nino some ~50 yeas ago. Despite that, since the observation is not 50 years ago, but today, - the proper term is "La-Nina", i believe (since the warming is pretty much global - yes, it's not uniform for all locations, but it is still pretty much global, only amplitude of it is varying, but not direction, right?).

All IMHO, and 2 cents only, of course.

[Shared Humanity]

It is important to understand all that and treat El-Nino and La-Nino terms (and events) for what they are (and not for more than that), yes. It is true that today's moderate La-Nina by absolute temperature of water masses in its heart - would be considered a weak (or even not so weak?) El-Nino some ~50 yeas ago. Despite that, since the observation is not 50 years ago, but today, - the proper term is "La-Nina", i believe (since the warming is pretty much global - yes, it's not uniform for all locations, but it is still pretty much global, only amplitude of it is varying, but not direction, right?).

That's not worth a red cent. Just reading it hurt.

We label, categorize, things, yes even scientists, to attempt to organize our thoughts and understandings about complex things that we are only able to partly understand. In the rapidly warming world, we now have the labels being shifted about trying to find a home. The effort strips the term of all meaning.

The term was coined in the 19th century, not by scientists but by Latin American fisherman. It's scientific usefulness is and always has been zilch. Do you want to talk about the Pacific Ocean? Fine. Let's talk about the long term temperature patterns and the processes that move the water about.

Recalculating a baseline for a term that is rooted in faith and fishing seems pretty damn pointless and only serves to obscure what is going on.

[Bruce Steele]

El Nino / La Nina is a climate induced change that results in eastern pacific water temperatures heating / cooling that is cyclicly persistent over vast stretches of time. So although the absolute temperature of the Pacific ocean may change over time the climate processes that on occasion move warm western pacific water masses eastward into the eastern pacific are maintained.  
 The chart in the article Morganism posted clearly shows the earths Watts per square meter response ( somewhat counterintuitive )  is reduced during El Nino and increased during La Nina. The earths  atmospheric temperature  response of heating during El Nino is a result of the pacific ocean ventilating heat. The reason the charts need to have their baseline adjusted over time as the oceans slowly warm ( or hypothetically cool ) is because eastern pacific temperature anomalies in the 3.4 region of the equatorial pacific are relative to recent temperature values but not necessarily the temperature absolutes of hundreds or thousands of years ago. 
 So I think I am agreeing with F. Tnioli that the eastern pacific equatorial surface ocean temperature values of a La Nina today may be similar to what an El Nino may have produced a couple hundred years ago.
 As far as names go " the child " is just a way to remember what time of year hot / low oxygen waters have arrived and crashed peruvian anchovy populations over the years. We fishermen named El Nino a long time before scientists had the ability to monitor water temperature anomalies in the 3.4 region of the equatorial pacific.
I believe the Walker circulation was named after an agricultural advisor in India who connected monsoon  timing/failure with atmospheric conditions in the Pacific. So names have their values and observation of weather patterns are of interest to fishermen and farmers even when we don't understand completely their causes.
Fishermen, farmers , hunters look for patterns that allow them to forecast future success. It may not be science but prediction , forecast, and response aren't the same thing as blind luck and observant men and women improve their chances of success. A little science is nice too but old successful fishermen/farmers are forged and hammered on the hard anvil of reality. There are plenty of scientists out there who wouldn't succeed / survive under the same conditions. Limited data , gut decisions ,and lethal consequences.

[F.Tnioli]

I think, no point to even waste your breath for him, Bruce. The person is using "the term was 1st coined by fishermen - not by scientists!" as an argument in a discussion, you know?

Unacceptable.

What any term was coined by whom, matters not. Current and common (at least within some specific part of human society(ies)) understanding of the term - is what's important. Our friend, probably, can't grasp this "difficult" concept, eh.

P.S. Next time, he'll probably attack all sciences' validity on the grounds that the term "science" was actually coined by some ancient folks who needed a term to describe the act of dissection and splitting of animals they killed during hunting ( http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/scio#Latin ); how barbaric the "science" term is, because "it is rooted in barbarism", eh; how "obscuring" it is that romans took the word and gave it a new meaning (along with a new letter or two), - "knowledge". How "pointless" it is that nowadays, we still use the word used by romans some 2+ thousands years ago. Etc etc. Well. Can't wait. Gives me a good laugh.

[Bruce Steele]

F.Tnioli,  I was just a bit upset with Shared Humanity over what I considered a minor insult to fishermen which wasn't probably Shared's intent at all. This site is populated with people from all around the globe and many don't have English as a native language. Reading and trying to follow some difficult science issues is fascinating and having the perspective of so many voices makes it much more interesting, to me anyhow. Politics is a different beast however and even speakers of the same language can easily cause insult , even when no insult is intended. Having been an active participant in politics for a couple decades hasn't left me enthusiastic to engage in that rather black art. If you might consider a minor critique of your last post I would like to call issue with everything you wrote after " P.S."   Your statement puts words into Shared's mouth and then argues with that statement. We call that a straw dog . A straw dog is a rhetorical device that is generally used in forums I avoid. I have learned a thing or two in the world of politics and one of them is don't make enemies you don't need ,putting words in other peoples mouths will generally get you enemies.
I will never make a good politician because I tend to like people , I like most people on this forum. Most of us here are worried about similar science based issues so avoiding fights is probably better than picking them. Please take this advice as friendly criticism. 
P.S. I took a couple years of Russian language in school. I spent many hours with it and got very poor grades compared to my science class efforts. That was the end of any formal education for me . I got married young and started fishing to pay the bills before I could legally buy a beer. I never lost interest in science. Politics is something American fishermen are forced into to stay in business, we have many many detractors. Believe me, I have taken a beating or two. I am proud that people in the NGO environment camp find me a worthy opponent, science being a stronger tool than rhetoric.   

[F.Tnioli]

He allowed himself the bit about the red cent, and the bit about the hurt. In response to that, i allowed myself that P.S. just above. Quid pro quo, isn't it. I admit there is the wisdom in your words, and i admit i should not waste my own breath, but sometimes it's fun; and you may call that a flaw - but i am not one of those fine christians who _do_ present the other cheek for slapping after the 1st was beaten.

Besides, it's just some little forum talk. I am not holding any grudge, and i'm sure Shared won't, too.

[Laurent]

Critical global ocean monitoring program struggling to stay afloat without funding promises, warn scientists
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2016/feb/24/critical-global-ocean-monitoring-program-struggling-to-stay-afloat-without-funding-promises-warn-scientists