Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?  (Read 3228 times)

VeliAlbertKallio

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 269
  • Eheu fugaces labuntur anni
    • View Profile
    • Sea Research Society (SRS)
  • Liked: 112
  • Likes Given: 129
Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« on: August 07, 2022, 10:44:52 AM »
This is a correction on your statement:

I would just crystallise on attached JP Steffensen's .mp4 that "Houston we have a problem here". Remember, JP Steffensen & Dorthe Dahl-Jensen are big names of the field not any hooky-boogies.

I need to draw your attention here on this question to recent Professor Jorgen Peder Steffensen's .mp4 interview (a well-known Greenland ice core researcher, the husband of renown and accoladed Professor Dorthe Dahl-Jensen) a researcher at the Centre for Ice and Climate at the University of Copenhagen's Niels Bohr Institute ice core librarian. Problem is one I pointed when I prepared reply UNFCCC65045 statement for the UN Secretary-general Javier Pérez de Cuéllar's earlier authorised UNGA101292 motion, then elaborated on the southern nations and indigenous peoples at CMPCC1.  https://unfccc.int/documents/65045

What you said, applies only when there is a spot emission of heat (a small volcanic eruption with radial dissipation of heat into surrounding water such as small effusive sea floor lava flooding or a Surtseyan Eruption) that relates to every effusive seafloor eruption of Holocene, but not to marine supervolcanoes VE8 of Pleistocene or Pliocene or Miocenene that produced enormous basalt volumes that even exceeded Toba eruption's VE8 eruption with land surface and air discharges of 3,500 cubic km of volcanic ejecta (thus the eastern Indian Ocean is covered 30-100 cm of ash from this event).

The subsurface eruptions of VE8 were much larger ones than those uplifted to land and air and their capacity to dissipate heat into ocean is magnitudes greater due to convection, a perpendicular field emission where superheated water rises to the ocean surface. This is what Ewing-Donn models did not think about and which we have revamped to explain JP Steffensen's finding of huge excess heat.

This does not apply for large Pleistocene, Pliocene, Oligocene, or Miocene effusive lava floods on the seafloor where the lateral extent of the effusive lava flood considerably exceeded the vertical column of water residing above (i.e. the thickness of ocean's water column ratio to spatial extent of the lava flood). Lamont–Doherty Earth Observatory (LDEO) in Palisades, New York) researchers Maurice Ewing and William Donn explained the ice ages to be triggered by solar insolation in Arctic that first opened Arctic Ocean removing sea ice, then the albedo change from snow and ice free ocean triggered a subsequent massive ocean evaporation which then led to the onset of the next ice age.

The Ewing-Donn Solar Insolation trigger for the ice ages did not work because when the ocean warms, also the Arctic permafrost soils warm up and melt which prevents any accumulation of snow on a permanent basis as snow melts easily on warm grounds. Therefore, the lake-snow effect from the Arctic Sea Ice was never the trigger of Pleistocene glaciations as earlier thought leading to return to Milankovich orbital effects. But the ice berg JP Steffensen has recently hit turns conventional wisdom around once again as Greenland Ice Sheet has been too warm through out. It is this that points now the cause of supervolcanism on East Greenland Sea - with the tropical steam form large lava flood events around Iceland providing that excess heat and warm nearly tropical tail-ends of the passing depression systems while rapidly switching onto the cold Katabatic winds and deposits from the direction of the Foxe-Laurentide Ice Dome as the depression system moved forward. These intense storms whipped huge waves lifting 200 ton boulders all the way to Bahamas.

It is a terrible solution to "resolve" mistaken science and lack of action of the north or the west by nuclear winter to re-freeze the Arctic in the (false) hope to re-start Arctic sea ice and Asian monsoon which some gung-ho people seem to be suggesting due to Asia's unbearable heat due to AGW.

The last time I saw this discussed, volcanic and geothermal activity was fully absorbed within 1k meters.  Leaving a huge amount of water undisturbed before you reach the surface.

No amount of mixing is going to bring it to the surface.

« Last Edit: August 07, 2022, 12:59:31 PM by oren »
"Setting off atomic bombs is considered socially pungent as the years are made of fleeting ice that are painted by the piling up of the rays of the sun."

oren

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8452
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3265
  • Likes Given: 3358
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #1 on: August 07, 2022, 01:01:48 PM »
I've moved this post from the melting season thread. Please post any discussion of vulcanism related to Arctic sea ice here, so as not to clog the main thread until a clear picture emerges whether such effects exist and whether they are significant.

OffTheGrid

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 184
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #2 on: August 12, 2022, 11:27:24 PM »
I have been observing regular and stronger every year for five northern summers now, persistent point source surface SO2 emitters from the Gakkel to Lomonosov particularly prolific north of Greenland. But also larger stronger but less numerous ones over the Alpha ridge and nth Chukchi rise.
These should not be able to reach surface if they were mere hydrothermal vent systems, or localised low level vulcanism as Veli suggests.
Decompression cooling is 2.5C per kilometre a parcel of water rises in this around 4 km deep water, that is ten degrees. And with mixing and high Salinity at depth, they need to be large prolonged events.
Larger centers underlie the Laptev hole we have been noticing.

Icegod

  • NewMembers
  • New ice
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #3 on: September 02, 2022, 01:47:40 PM »
Facts are and nobody can deny this the ice is in better shape a decade later than 2012....Is this decade all noise? Was 2012 an anomaly? 2016 and 2020 would suggest not.....but the Beaufort gyre has warm cycles and cold cycles and it operates on a 4 year cycle. I suggest that 2016 and 2020 will be approached in 2024.....
I think you can say a VEI6 volcanic eruption has an impact on the atmosphere which is beneficial to the ice.

Whilst Hunga Tonga was initially categorised as a 5, later analysis showed that the undersea nature of the eruption had masked the size of the event.

This being true the effect will wane over the next 2 years and we will see the true state.

As for 2012 being an anomaly?  Of course it was.  The GAC was an anomaly not seen before or after.  Whilst many storms since have been called GAC, none of them were like 2012.

The biggest indicator of the trend in the Arctic is the 2020 melt without 2012 storm input.

Wasn't Pinatubo a VEI6 in 1991? I heard the ash column from Tonga did reach the stratosphere and that would cool things down, I was thinking next season would be affected by the volcano not so much this year but I could be wrong.

oren

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8452
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3265
  • Likes Given: 3358
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #4 on: September 02, 2022, 04:34:48 PM »
I think the claim Hunga Tonga affected Arctic sea ice this year needs much more substantiation, as its basic parameters do not point to such effect. Much less sulfur than climate-affecting eruptions like Pinatubo, and being in the southern hemisphere.
« Last Edit: September 03, 2022, 01:02:22 PM by oren »

OffTheGrid

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 184
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #5 on: September 03, 2022, 12:01:27 AM »
The size of the blast in energy terms was widely understated. It put a huge volume of water vapor in the Stratosphere, and exosphere that has been reported as having doubled stratospheric water vapour worldwide, causing global heating. Stratospheric ice cloud is also being nucleated by the salts, which has a powerful greenhouse heating effect. We have not had a winter in New Zealand this year. No frost's. Sweating in a T-shirt under shade of trees in the day, summerlike temperatures at night.

NotaDenier

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 138
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 58
  • Likes Given: 36
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #6 on: September 04, 2022, 01:09:43 PM »
https://www.npr.org/2022/08/03/1115378385/tonga-volcano-stratosphere-water-warming

The huge amount of water will likely raise temperatures
Earlier large volcanic eruptions have affected climate, but they usually cool temperatures, because they send light-scattering aerosols into the stratosphere. Those aerosols act as a sort of massive layer of sunscreen. But since water vapor traps heat, the Tongan eruption could temporarily raise temperatures a bit, the researchers said.

It normally takes around 2-3 years for sulfate aerosols from volcanoes to fall out of the stratosphere. But the water from the Jan. 15 eruption could take 5-10 years to fully dissipate.

Given that timeframe and the extraordinary amount of water involved, Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai "may be the first volcanic eruption observed to impact climate not through surface cooling caused by volcanic sulfate aerosols, but rather through surface warming," the researchers said in their paper.

NotaDenier

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 138
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 58
  • Likes Given: 36
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #7 on: September 04, 2022, 01:12:37 PM »
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2022GL099381


Following the 15 January 2022 Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai eruption, several trace gases measured by the Aura Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) displayed anomalous stratospheric values. Trajectories and radiance simulations confirm that the H2O, SO2, and HCl enhancements were injected by the eruption. In comparison with those from previous eruptions, the SO2 and HCl mass injections were unexceptional, although they reached higher altitudes. In contrast, the H2O injection was unprecedented in both magnitude (far exceeding any previous values in the 17-year MLS record) and altitude (penetrating into the mesosphere). We estimate the mass of H2O injected into the stratosphere to be 146 ± 5 Tg, or ∼10% of the stratospheric burden. It may take several years for the H2O plume to dissipate. This eruption could impact climate not through surface cooling due to sulfate aerosols, but rather through surface warming due to the radiative forcing from the excess stratospheric H2O.



The HT-HH eruption did not inject vast amounts of either HCl or SO2 into the stratosphere. The total injected mass of stratospheric SO2 (calculated as described by Pumphrey et al. (2021)) was 0.41 ± 0.02 Tg, which pales in comparison to that from previous eruptions measured by MLS, such as the 2008 Kasatochi, the 2009 Sarychev, or the 2019 Raikoke eruptions, which each emitted ∼1 Tg (de Leeuw et al., 2021; Pumphrey et al., 2015). The mass of SO2 injected by HT-HH is even less noteworthy in the context of the 17 Tg injected by the 1991 Pinatubo eruption (Read et al., 1993).

The only unusual aspect of the SO2 plume is its injection height. SO2 plumes are typically injected at altitudes no higher than 46 hPa (∼21 km) (Carn et al., 2016; Pumphrey et al., 2015). HT-HH is the only injection observed by MLS that produced maximum values of SO2 at 14 hPa (∼29 km), with enhanced values detected up to 6.8 hPa (∼35 km)—outside the normally recommended pressure range for MLS SO2. By 27 January, the SO2 plume dropped below background levels (Figure S1 in Supporting Information S1).

The HCl injection was similarly unremarkable, with only 8 profiles during 16–18 January (barely) exceeding the threshold for enhancement (Figure 2c; Figure S1 in Supporting Information S1). As with SO2, the only unusual aspect of the HCl plume is its injection height of 31.6 hPa (∼24 km), whereas previous eruptions reached no higher than 68 hPa (∼18.6 km).

In contrast, the magnitude of the HT-HH H2O injection is unprecedented. Three natural pathways for direct injection of H2O into the stratosphere exist: overshooting convection, pyrocumulonimbus (pyroCb) storms, and volcanic eruptions. The previous stratospheric H2O record measured by MLS was 26.3 ppmv at 100 hPa associated with an overshooting convective event in August 2019 that spanned thousands of square kilometers and persisted for several hours (Werner et al., 2020). Two pyroCbs stand out in the MLS H2O record: the 2017 Pacific Northwest (Pumphrey et al., 2021) and the 2019/2020 Australian New Year's (Kablick et al., 2020; Khaykin et al., 2020; Schwartz et al., 2020) events. Only the Australian pyroCbs injected enough H2O to allow an accurate estimate of mass (19 ± 3 Tg).

The 2008 Kasatochi (Schwartz et al., 2013) and the 2015 Calbuco (Sioris et al., 2016) volcanic eruptions were the only others in the MLS record that injected appreciable amounts of H2O into the stratosphere. Neither deposited H2O at altitudes higher than 68 hPa (∼18.6 km), and both injections were too small for a reliable H2O mass estimate.

The HT-HH eruption injected at least 146 ± 5 Tg of H2O into the stratosphere, not only surpassing the magnitudes of all other injections in the MLS record, but also eclipsing a theoretical estimate of 37.5 Tg from Pinatubo (Pitari & Mancini, 2002). This stratospheric H2O injection is unique in the satellite record (1979 to date). To put the HT-HH injection into perspective, the enhancement represents ∼10% of the estimated stratospheric H2O burden of 1400 Tg (Glaze et al., 1997). Further, the H2O plume injection height far exceeded that of any other injections in the MLS record (Figure 3).
« Last Edit: September 04, 2022, 01:25:46 PM by NotaDenier »

NotaDenier

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 138
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 58
  • Likes Given: 36
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #8 on: September 04, 2022, 01:33:16 PM »
That study was a really good read.

Other knock on effects:

The importance of stratospheric H2O is well established; it affects stratospheric chemistry and dynamics as well as atmospheric radiation. For example, excess stratospheric H2O could lead to enhanced OH concentrations, slightly enhancing O3 production through the CH4 oxidation cycle but worsening O3 depletion through the HOx cycle, leading to a net decrease in O3 (e.g., Dvortsov & Solomon, 2001; Stenke & Grewe, 2005). The enhanced OH concentrations could also increase the loss of CH4, resulting in a decrease in its lifetime (e.g., Ko et al., 2013; Stevenson et al., 2020) and thus reducing its long-term effect on climate. In addition, if enhanced H2O concentrations were to be entrained into the developing Antarctic vortex to an extent sufficient to raise the formation temperature of polar stratospheric clouds, then the earlier onset of heterogeneous processing would exacerbate cumulative chemical O3 loss. In terms of transport, a study of the dynamical response to a uniform doubling of stratospheric H2O concluded that such moistening could reduce stratospheric temperature and increase the strength of the BDC; it could also result in the tropospheric westerly jets becoming stronger and storm tracks shifting poleward (Maycock et al., 2013). Since the HT-HH injection is ∼10% of the stratospheric H2O burden, a dynamical response of lesser magnitude than that found by Maycock et al. (2013) would be expected.

H2O enters the stratosphere primarily in the tropics, where it freeze-dries at the cold point tropopause (Brewer, 1949). This mechanism gives rise to the “tape recorder,” whereby the annual cycle in tropopause temperatures is imprinted in alternating bands of dry and moist air rising in the tropical stratosphere (Mote et al., 1996). By short-circuiting the pathway through the cold point, HT-HH has disrupted this “heartbeat” signal (Figure 5a).

Consistent with the freeze-drying mechanism, unusually low tropopause temperatures around 2001 led to a sharp drop in the amount of H2O entering the stratosphere (e.g., Randel et al., 2006; Rosenlof & Reid, 2008; Figure 5). This dry anomaly propagated via the BDC (Randel et al., 2006; Urban et al., 2014), slowly rising through the stratosphere and moving toward the poles. Using the propagation of the 2001 H2O drop as described by Brinkop et al. (2016) as an analog for the transport of the HT-HH plume, we expect that ascent could carry volcanic H2O to 10 hPa within ∼9 months. The excess H2O could arrive in northern and southern midlatitudes in ∼18 and ∼24 months, respectively, over a broad domain in the upper stratosphere. Since part of the plume has entered the lower branch of the BDC, the elevated H2O may reach lower stratospheric midlatitudes within a few months. The timescale for complete dissipation of the plume may be 5–10 years (Hall & Waugh, 1997).

Radiative calculations of the sudden drop in H2O of ∼0.4 ppmv (at 100 hPa) in 2001 (Figure 5b) demonstrated that the radiative forcing from even small variations in lower stratospheric H2O could induce decadal-scale changes in global-mean surface temperature (e.g., Solomon et al., 2010). The unprecedented HT-HH enhancement would correspond to ∼1.5 ppmv (at 31 hPa) if averaged over 60°S–60°N.

Previous studies of the radiative effects of stratospheric H2O perturbations, including direct volcanic injection, have shown that they can cause surface warming (e.g., Joshi & Jones, 2009; Rind & Lonergan, 1995). As established in Section 3, the HT-HH eruption was unusual in that it injected extremely large amounts of H2O. Preliminary climate model simulations (see Supporting Information S1 for details) suggest an effective radiative forcing (e.g., Forster et al., 2001; Myhre et al., 2013; Smith et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2017) at the tropopause of +0.15 Wm−2 due to the stratospheric H2O enhancement (Figure S3b in Supporting Information S1). For comparison, the radiative forcing increase due to the CO2 growth from 1996 to 2005 was about +0.26 Wm−2 (Solomon et al., 2010).

The HT-HH H2O enhancement will exert a positive radiative forcing on the surface, offsetting the surface cooling caused by the aerosol radiative forcing (e.g., Sellitto et al., 2022; Zhang et al., 2022). Given the extraordinary magnitude of the HT-HH H2O injection and the fact that its anticipated stratospheric residence time exceeds the typical 2–3 years timescale for sulfate aerosols to fall out of the stratosphere (Joshi & Jones, 2009), HT-HH may be the first volcanic eruption observed to impact climate not through surface cooling caused by volcanic sulfate aerosols, but rather through surface warming caused by excess H2O radiative forcing.

In summary, MLS measurements indicate that an exceptional amount of H2O was injected directly into the stratosphere by the HT-HH eruption. We estimate that the magnitude of the injection constituted at least 10% of the total stratospheric H2O burden. On the day of the eruption, the H2O plume reached ∼53 km altitude. The H2O injection bypassed the cold point tropopause, disrupted the H2O tape recorder signal, set a new record for H2O injection height in the 17-year MLS record, and could alter stratospheric chemistry and dynamics as the long-lived H2O plume propagates through the stratosphere in the BDC. Unlike previous strong eruptions in the satellite era, HT-HH could impact climate not through surface cooling due to sulfate aerosols, but rather through surface warming due to the excess stratospheric H2O forcing. Given the potential high-impact consequences of the HT-HH H2O injection, it is critical to continue monitoring volcanic gases from this eruption and future ones to better quantify their varying roles in climate.

oren

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8452
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3265
  • Likes Given: 3358
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #9 on: September 04, 2022, 02:58:22 PM »
Thanks! Very interesting.

El Cid

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2089
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 799
  • Likes Given: 204
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #10 on: September 04, 2022, 03:42:15 PM »
Aren't the two hempsihere's atmosheric circulations somewhat separated so shouldn't the effect mainly be on the S hemisphere?

NotaDenier

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 138
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 58
  • Likes Given: 36
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #11 on: September 04, 2022, 05:40:36 PM »
Aren't the two hempsihere's atmosheric circulations somewhat separated so shouldn't the effect mainly be on the S hemisphere?

I was hoping fish out water or one of the other people with a deep understanding of the atmosphere would reply.

I am certain there will be follow up papers exploring the knock on effects.

Less ozone?
Less methane?

The Walrus

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1968
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 114
  • Likes Given: 390
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #12 on: September 04, 2022, 05:43:08 PM »
Aren't the two hempsihere's atmosheric circulations somewhat separated so shouldn't the effect mainly be on the S hemisphere?

Yes, they are, and yes, it should.

oren

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8452
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3265
  • Likes Given: 3358
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #13 on: September 04, 2022, 07:18:15 PM »
I am very far from being knowledgeable on this, but the article says no, it spreads both north and south, and indeed a quick web search tells me the lower atmospheric circulation is split into cells, however the stratospheric circulation is one single cell.

Quote
The overall circulation of the stratosphere is termed as Brewer-Dobson circulation, which is a single-celled circulation, spanning from the tropics up to the poles, consisting of the tropical upwelling of air from the tropical troposphere and the extra-tropical downwelling of air.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratosphere#Circulation_and_mixing

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brewer%E2%80%93Dobson_circulation

Phil.

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 423
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 55
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #14 on: September 05, 2022, 01:31:14 AM »
Since the eruption was in the S hemisphere the effects should spread towards the s pole, maybe one of the reasons for the record low seaice in the antarctic this year?

NotaDenier

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 138
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 58
  • Likes Given: 36
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #15 on: September 05, 2022, 01:31:16 PM »
Since the eruption was in the S hemisphere the effects should spread towards the s pole, maybe one of the reasons for the record low seaice in the antarctic this year?

Per the article I would expect the greatest effects of radiative forcing the entire year of 2024. Then slowly fading after that, with the studies guesstimate that effect is fully gone by 2032.

Consistent with the freeze-drying mechanism, unusually low tropopause temperatures around 2001 led to a sharp drop in the amount of H2O entering the stratosphere (e.g., Randel et al., 2006; Rosenlof & Reid, 2008; Figure 5). This dry anomaly propagated via the BDC (Randel et al., 2006; Urban et al., 2014), slowly rising through the stratosphere and moving toward the poles. Using the propagation of the 2001 H2O drop as described by Brinkop et al. (2016) as an analog for the transport of the HT-HH plume, we expect that ascent could carry volcanic H2O to 10 hPa within ∼9 months. The excess H2O could arrive in northern and southern midlatitudes in ∼18 and ∼24 months, respectively, over a broad domain in the upper stratosphere. Since part of the plume has entered the lower branch of the BDC, the elevated H2O may reach lower stratospheric midlatitudes within a few months. The timescale for complete dissipation of the plume may be 5–10 years (Hall & Waugh, 1997).

kassy

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5650
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1836
  • Likes Given: 1828
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #16 on: September 05, 2022, 05:16:43 PM »
Really interesting article. Also quite troubling. The numbers work out to about a 5 years increase due to CO2 in the referenced period. That in itself is still a fuzzy metric but we get extra warming on top of our own inaction.
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Freegrass

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3308
  • "I" don't exist... Because "I" is ego... 🙏
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 833
  • Likes Given: 1100
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #17 on: September 05, 2022, 05:22:21 PM »
Really interesting article. Also quite troubling. The numbers work out to about a 5 years increase due to CO2 in the referenced period. That in itself is still a fuzzy metric but we get extra warming on top of our own inaction.
Imagine getting a strong El Niño on top of that. That could be catastrophic...
When factual science is in conflict with our beliefs or traditions, we cuddle up in our own delusional fantasy where everything starts making sense again...

FishOutofWater

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1041
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 671
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #18 on: September 05, 2022, 05:43:22 PM »
I have never seen such a large divergence between the Northern Hemisphere (NH) and Southern Hemisphere (SH) in SSTs and temperatures. Water vapor and sulfate in the stratosphere will slowly mix into the northern hemisphere from the southern hemisphere. I would prefer to see actual maps of measured levels of water vapor than to make a bad prediction or description. The Tonga eruption is very interesting with unprecedented transport of water vapor to the SH stratosphere but what's going on now is above my pay grade.

Moreover, there's the third year of La Niña with very intense tropical convection and subtropical subsidence.

The difference between the positive NH and negative SH anomalies right now is extreme.

As for geologically historical volcanism affecting climate ,the north Atlantic volcanic province was an extreme event that could have impacted the climate, especially if volcanoes erupted in water that was shallow enough so that it behaved like the Tonga event. I think that the hypothesis provided above is a viable one. Here's a recent scientific report on the possible PETM connection.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-12957-1

Abstract

Large Igneous Provinces (LIPs) are associated with the largest climate perturbations in Earth’s history. The North Atlantic Igneous Province (NAIP) and Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM) constitute an exemplar of this association. As yet we have no means to reconstruct the pacing of LIP greenhouse gas emissions for comparison with climate records at millennial resolution. Here, we calculate carbon-based greenhouse gas fluxes associated with the NAIP at sub-millennial resolution by linking measurements of the mantle convection process that generated NAIP magma with observations of the individual geological structures that controlled gas emissions in a Monte Carlo framework. These simulations predict peak emissions flux of 0.2–0.5 PgC yr–1 and show that the NAIP could have initiated PETM climate change. This is the first predictive model of carbon emissions flux from any proposed PETM carbon source that is directly constrained by observations of the geological structures that controlled the emissions.





« Last Edit: September 05, 2022, 06:33:56 PM by FishOutofWater »

OffTheGrid

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 184
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #19 on: September 19, 2022, 07:48:14 AM »
Well this is a bit of a shock.
Seems the Magnetic North Pole has tracked right through that low concentration area in the last six months. And is now right smack bang by the Laptev supervolcano Caldera.
This could have been having effects on ocean currents via magnetohydrodynamic effects.
 
It also could mean that there is more high energy particle energy from the active solar flaring this cycle coming in on this side.
What's called fast solar protons and ions from flares and mass ejections.

Since there's been peer reviewed papers published in the last year saying this energy input is similar to the solar photon irradiance in magnitude at polar latitudes now, and due to our weakening magnetic field, and increased flux from the sun it's doubled in the last century, it's kind of a shame it hasn't been included in any climate models.

Annoyingly there hasn't been any new SMOS scans on DMI for 5 days. Possibly this venerable old friend has succumbed to the elements after 12 good years of service. Or they don't want their military radars being spotted.
In case it's the last word, shot attached.

oren

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8452
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3265
  • Likes Given: 3358
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #20 on: September 19, 2022, 09:36:17 AM »
Much of the above sounds like nonsense to me, but I approved it in this thread (moved from the season thread) so it can be discussed and responded to.

OffTheGrid

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 184
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #21 on: September 19, 2022, 12:06:07 PM »
Thank you Oren.
The correlations between geomagnetic events electromagnetic phenomena and vulcanism are well established, though the mechanisms are not well understood. But I guess that is always the case with science.
I'm a little busy, have a conference call with David Holland who was in the video about the four degree Celsius water coming out under Thwaites. I spoke to him last week but he was In Korea, and the connection was poor. Hope to get more details but the Dotson mooring had been recording big outbursts, very hot, very saline. As I've been tracking, at both Poles.
He is well aware now that geothermal and Volcanic processes are kicking in.

We are not just getting stratospheric water injections from Tonga, it appears.
And since there is clear Antipodal Coupling going on in all these events, it's relevant to the Arctic in way that cannot be decoupled via reductionism.

What do we think of these 100 % relative humidity figures 20km up in Antarctica?
I have SAR tiles of the action. Perhaps I'll post them later.

kassy

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5650
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1836
  • Likes Given: 1828
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #22 on: September 19, 2022, 01:55:42 PM »
Quote
Since there's been peer reviewed papers published in the last year saying this energy input is similar to the solar photon irradiance in magnitude at polar latitudes now, and due to our weakening magnetic field, and increased flux from the sun it's doubled in the last century, it's kind of a shame it hasn't been included in any climate models.

Could you add links for these (some time you are not busy)?
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

OffTheGrid

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 184
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #23 on: September 19, 2022, 06:54:56 PM »
Sure, I may even have the PDFs. But since I tend to read a dozen papers on average a day, and download file names are random numbers I always have a sorting and renaming issue. Especially if I get in  areal research frenzy, following reference trails etc. Then it can be hundreds of papers a day. There's a YouTube channel suspicious observers that brings out the published literature with links. Though I find the Ben who runs it obnoxious, and over attached to his own theories, that's not uncommon I concede.

kassy

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5650
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1836
  • Likes Given: 1828
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #24 on: September 19, 2022, 09:24:29 PM »
Just links on the quoted claim would be ok to start, if only to look at the type of similarity.
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

OffTheGrid

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 184
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #25 on: September 19, 2022, 11:27:40 PM »
Here's those SAR tiles of the spring tide events in Pine Island and Atlantic sector East Antarctica, and an animation of the deep Ocean SO2 emitters in the Arctic basin and Greenland Sea sector, that have now grown in area to over 1 million square km.
Probably Volcanic. They could be large hot low salinity Spring systems fed by sub-basal flow paths from Greenland.
Kasey. I told you it's not a claim. Its peer reviewed literature. There's hundreds of relevant papers if you want to start. Thread on Solar particle fluxes heating the Arctic.
The Activity in the Arctic is Antipodal to the Thwaites-Ross-East Antarctic area West of the Ross sea that are active volcanic fields 40Ma to present.

oren

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8452
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3265
  • Likes Given: 3358
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #26 on: September 19, 2022, 11:47:22 PM »
OTG, you do not support your claim with the actual literature, yet you claim it exists. Still remains just a claim, though.

uniquorn

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4562
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1975
  • Likes Given: 374
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #27 on: September 20, 2022, 12:25:57 AM »
observed and modelled magnetic declination, modelled 2022 in green.
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/maps/historical_declination/

IGRF model
Quote
169.615 86.568 2019.000
162.867 86.494 2020.000
156.786 86.400 2021.000
151.272 86.275 2022.000
146.334 86.126 2023.000
141.945 85.958 2024.000
138.057 85.778 2025.000

WMM model
Quote
164.036 86.502 2020.000
157.690 86.415 2021.000
151.948 86.294 2022.000
146.826 86.146 2023.000
142.293 85.980 2024.000
138.299 85.801 2025.000
« Last Edit: September 20, 2022, 12:52:09 AM by uniquorn »

OffTheGrid

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 184
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #28 on: September 20, 2022, 04:14:17 AM »

I've Pm d you my reasons. If you want to go there start a thread.

OTG, you do not support your claim with the actual literature, yet you claim it exists. Still remains just a claim, though.

OffTheGrid

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 184
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #29 on: September 20, 2022, 04:29:57 AM »

Well that's just fantastic! They don't have observed data included last 2007. Since the field weakened 10 percent in the 20th century and 10% more in the first decay of the 21st, we have had no further reports of its strength.
Lucky we have dedicated civilian scientists that have set up accurate observatories and muon detectors around the Arctic basin coast to track it or we wouldn't even know.
Thank you MaverickStar for the effort. He's a bit of a whinning pom with his own mix of questionable hypothesis, but at least your allowed them if you're not in the market driven science establishment.🙄

observed and modelled magnetic declination, modelled 2022 in green.
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/maps/historical_declination/

IGRF model
Quote
169.615 86.568 2019.000
162.867 86.494 2020.000
156.786 86.400 2021.000
151.272 86.275 2022.000
146.334 86.126 2023.000
141.945 85.958 2024.000
138.057 85.778 2025.000

WMM model
Quote
164.036 86.502 2020.000
157.690 86.415 2021.000
151.948 86.294 2022.000
146.826 86.146 2023.000
142.293 85.980 2024.000
138.299 85.801 2025.000

oren

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8452
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3265
  • Likes Given: 3358
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #30 on: September 20, 2022, 07:36:28 AM »

I've Pm d you my reasons. If you want to go there start a thread.

OTG, you do not support your claim with the actual literature, yet you claim it exists. Still remains just a claim, though.
Sorry but having read the pm, no I don't want you to go into that nonsense, and I also request you stop spreading the false claim above on  high energy particle energy flux heating the Arctic unless it's joined in the very same post by hard scientific data.

Freegrass

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3308
  • "I" don't exist... Because "I" is ego... 🙏
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 833
  • Likes Given: 1100
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #31 on: September 20, 2022, 07:58:27 AM »
Sure, I may even have the PDFs. But since I tend to read a dozen papers on average a day, and download file names are random numbers I always have a sorting and renaming issue. Especially if I get in  areal research frenzy, following reference trails etc. Then it can be hundreds of papers a day. There's a YouTube channel suspicious observers that brings out the published literature with links. Though I find the Ben who runs it obnoxious, and over attached to his own theories, that's not uncommon I concede.
If you read that many papers a day, surely you'll be able to post a link to at least one of them?
When factual science is in conflict with our beliefs or traditions, we cuddle up in our own delusional fantasy where everything starts making sense again...

OffTheGrid

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 184
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #32 on: September 20, 2022, 10:11:14 AM »
All right.

Here's one explaining the 40% underestimate of particle fluxs penetrating the magnetosphere. Rather good in detail explaination of how the magnetic field lines connect from the Sun to the polar regions and, of course the charged particles spiral around
in concentric and braided shells.
That's what's been causing the increasing small vortex structures you have been able to see for a few years now over the poles.

And another that goes into the ozone depletion, and observed warming caused by recent events, that don't have to be anywhere as large as our magnetic field
weakens, for compatible effects.

 As Mr musk found out with his Starlink launch.

For an idea of the energy fluxes involved.
Quote below.

Feel free to convert the 30MeV times 10 to the power of 12 per square cm per second Into a kilowatts per square meter figure. Anyone?

No one will believe it if I do it. ::)

"significant changes in the surface air temperature were
identified for the Carrington flare, with Europe and Russia
experiencing warming of +7°C (Calisto et al. 2013); the 2003
SEP event was responsible for temperature variations of up to
+3°C (Jackman et al. 2007).
The terrestrial effects of the putative superflare in AD 775
were explored in Thomas et al. (2013), and it was concluded
that an SEP fluence of ~ - 10^12 protons /cm^2 [that means per second] of particles with
energies >30 MeV would lead to severe damage of the
biosphere"

oren

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8452
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3265
  • Likes Given: 3358
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #33 on: September 20, 2022, 11:38:41 AM »
Are you looking at the flux of a superflare that happens once every millennium, and assuming that flux is constant?
If not, what is the relevance of a paper discussing "Risks for Life on Habitable Planets from Superflares of Their Host Stars"?

OffTheGrid

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 184
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #34 on: September 20, 2022, 07:51:09 PM »
I think you were misled by the title. The paper is discussing the ~1500 year periodicity of the DO, event superflares that have shown up in the Tree Ring studies, and Ice Cores. The dating is difficult. It may have been the 536AD event not 775AD. And as per attached paper it could be inner proton belt discharge from a Magnetic Excursion. At up to 1000 protons per cubic cm, (not per second) with energies up to over 200MeV, average about 50MeV (see study) it is very similar properties to the ones that seem to hit the Earth every 1500 or 1600 years. And the Dipole setup with North and South Poles rushing towards India, will bring it closer to the Atlantic side.

OffTheGrid

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 184
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #35 on: September 20, 2022, 07:55:46 PM »
That figure is Around 100 kW per square meter.
The everyday average is more like 1kW. Distributed to Oceans, atmosphere and deep crust and mantle by the muon shrapnel of smashed nuclei.
Not included in Climate models.

oren

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8452
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3265
  • Likes Given: 3358
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #36 on: September 20, 2022, 08:43:46 PM »
Seriously? A 1 kW/m2 factor is missing from climate models and nobody finds the discrepancy but you? 1kW!
I'll take the other side of this bet.

If you wish to continue this, please quote relevant sections from these papers and explain a full logical chain of how and where this 1 kW comes from. Just attaching PDFs with not so relevant titles, and hand waving as to what's included in them doesn't cut it.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

OffTheGrid

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 184
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #37 on: September 21, 2022, 09:52:58 AM »
Sure. I agree, extraordinary claims do require extraordinary evidence.
But simple observed data

<Snipped the philosophical drivel. Do give observed data. O>
« Last Edit: September 21, 2022, 11:11:57 AM by oren »

kassy

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5650
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1836
  • Likes Given: 1828
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #38 on: September 21, 2022, 04:31:49 PM »
And still most interested in the papers i asked for in reply 22. Those are much more relatable quantities then megaflares on a thousands year time scale.
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

uniquorn

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4562
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1975
  • Likes Given: 374
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #39 on: September 21, 2022, 07:48:13 PM »
1. noaa magnetic declination, 1940-2025  (14MB)
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/maps/historical_declination/

2. https://earth.esa.int/eogateway/tools/vires-for-swarm
Quote
VirES for Swarm

The virtual research service - VirES for Swarm - adds discovery and visual analytics capabilities to the European Space Agency's online data access services established for the Swarm geomagnetic satellite mission constellation.

VirES provides a highly interactive data manipulation and retrieval web interface for the official Swarm product archive and for a number of ancillary data sets. It includes multi-dimensional geographical visualisation, interactive plotting and on-demand processing tools for studying Earth magnetic models and their time variations for comparison to the Swarm satellite measurements at given global context of space weather. Subsets of Swarm data selected by versatile filtering methods can be downloaded in different encoding formats. The data downloaded can be combined to fit various use cases.

VirES is also an environment for preparation of publication-ready graphics and charts through an intuitive and powerful, yet customisable, interface. An embedded online tutorial introduces the features of the VirES service.

The VirES service is actively and continuously being developed by ESA in close collaboration with leading experts of geomagnetism to ensure the best possible user experience and scientific validation of the presented information.
« Last Edit: September 21, 2022, 08:47:56 PM by uniquorn »

OffTheGrid

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 184
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #40 on: September 22, 2022, 12:27:42 AM »
Yes Kassy,
And we have a 1500 year DO cycle, a 12700 year Heinrich Cycle and a 100000 year Glacial cycle of these all aligning now. (IN ESSENCE THIS IS ANOTHER FORM OF AGW DENIAL, INVENTING OTHER REASONS WHY WE SEE WHAT WE SEE).
The Carolina Bays formations and the associated black slime layers in the strata across Europe and North America, at the 12700, 26000, and 39000 year magnetic excusions are well studied. If you wish to pursue these by indulging in some googling yourself, may the force be with you.
In particular, the strata below the North American Younger Dryas layer has high energy particle tracks in the rock, and anomalous U238 bred to plutonium 239 in the Granite. No science has been able to adequately explain this beyond hypothesis such as a mysterious nearby SuperNova. (THIS IS NOT TRUE)
I am an engineer. An engineer's mindset is to foresee what is the worst we may be expected to need to prepare for, and advise and build to handle those challenges.
Not to run around finding evidence from entrenched dogmatic institutionalised analysis of the past to convince you of anything.

Remember what Hansen said.

"Scientific Reticence Will Kill Us All!"


And still most interested in the papers i asked for in reply 22. Those are much more relatable quantities then megaflares on a thousands year time scale.

WARNING: THE ABOVE ARE UNSUBSTANTIATED CLAIMS NOT SUPPORTED BY SCIENCE

<CAPS are mine. Tired of this nonsense. O>
« Last Edit: September 22, 2022, 07:59:05 AM by oren »

OffTheGrid

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 184
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #41 on: September 22, 2022, 02:01:33 AM »
Regarding Swarm, Uniquorn, there are differences between the dip-pole where a compass points directly down. The Dipole which is an averaged axis of the field, as swarm may be capable of measurement of from space. But it is highly variable, not a stable thing as one may Imagine, and the geomagnetic pole as pointed towards by compasses at various locations, which varies due to different magnetic properties and fields locked in to rock below the curie temperature.

This is relevant to this general discussion:
" As well as lining up the best available estimates of flood basalt eruptions with periods of drastic species extinction  —  including but not limited to the five mass extinctions  —  the team also created randomly generated timelines to test 100 million similar patterns.

They found that less than 1% of the simulated timelines agreed as well as the actual record of flood basalts and extinctions, suggesting the relationship between massive volcanic eruptions and mass extinction is not just random chance.

These new findings may shift the balance in favor of tremendous volcanic activity, "

https://www.space.com/dinosaur-extinction-volcanoes-aided-asteroid-impact


OffTheGrid

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 184
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #42 on: September 22, 2022, 02:43:09 AM »
I would also point out that the swarm data is affected by the magnetic field of the counter-rotating Proton Belt, which has highest proton densities in shells near the Mirror planes, around 50-60 degrees north and south, interleaved with electron shells that drift in the opposite direction around the equator, and  donut shaped outer electron Toroid, from 45,000km up out to over 100 thousand km,
With its 100 thousand electrons per cubic cm, and average electron masses 15 times an electron restmass.
There is a very large inertia in that System. And it generates a Dipole magnetic field, and stabilises to some degree the the Earths internal field.

johnm33

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 371
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 83
  • Likes Given: 44
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #43 on: September 24, 2022, 11:09:55 AM »
I have mentioned elsewhere that I have taken a different view of vulcanism, based on a hydridic earth model. I suppose relevent to this thread is that the aurora make more sense to me as residuals of a more powerful force that flows through the center of the circle, such that the counter-rotating current sheets which form the aurora are similar to the magnetic residual around a live electric wire. Whatever the force is I suspect it's superluminal and our only way of percieving it's prescence is through what we call 'fields' which are induced residuals. I'm guessing the force has 3 main axis which could be seen as 6 given cw/acw rotation and since charged particles are clearly attracted to it it must be somewhat electrical in nature. Some part of this energetic flow seems to be captured by the earth and leads to the creation of protons within the core whose escape drives the hydrogen based chemistry which leads to vulcanism.

OffTheGrid

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 184
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #44 on: September 24, 2022, 11:10:53 PM »
 The Muon's Caused by high energy particles smashing atmospheric atomic Nuclei pretty much are exactly what you are describing John.

 Here's One explaining what you are looking at in that Gif above of the deep ocean SO2 emitters. Times a few hundred or a thousand of this one Basaltic intrusion in this study of course.

Personally I'm inclined to be sceptical of the 55Ma BP date assigned to this East Greenland intrusion in this study:

https://www.science.org/doi/epdf/10.1126/sciadv.abq0394

" Skaergaard intrusion that started crystallizing from all margins inward only after it had been completely filled with magma. Our numerical simulations indicate that to keep the growing Skaergaard magma chamber completely molten, the vertical growth rate must have been on the order of several hundreds to a few thousands of meters per year, corresponding to volumetric flow rates of tens to hundreds of cubic kilometers per year. These rates are several orders of magnitude higher than current estimates and were likely achieved by rapid subsidence of the floor rocks along faults. We propose that the Skaergaard is a plutonic equivalent of supereruptions or intrusions that grow via catastrophically rapid magma emplacement into the crust, producing totally molten magma chambers in a matter of a few months to dozens of years."

El Cid

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2089
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 799
  • Likes Given: 204
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #45 on: September 27, 2022, 07:51:40 PM »
Good summary on the possible effects of the volcanic event on our climate:

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2022GL099381

1. The effects will be felt throughout the next 5-10 years:

" we expect that ascent could carry volcanic H2O to 10 hPa within ∼9 months. The excess H2O could arrive in northern and southern midlatitudes in ∼18 and ∼24 months, respectively, over a broad domain in the upper stratosphere. Since part of the plume has entered the lower branch of the BDC, the elevated H2O may reach lower stratospheric midlatitudes within a few months. The timescale for complete dissipation of the plume may be 5–10 years"

2. The effect could be 0,1-0,15 C, which is quite significant I think:

"Preliminary climate model simulationssuggest an effective radiative forcing , at the tropopause of +0.15 Wm−2 due to the stratospheric H2O enhancement . For comparison, the radiative forcing increase due to the CO2 growth from 1996 to 2005 was about +0.26 Wm−2"

Climate sensitivity is likely in the range of 0,7-1 C /W/m2, so the effect is 0,1-0,15 C

trm1958

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 214
  • Will civilization survive Climate Breakdown?
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 146
Re: Possible effects of vulcanism on Arctic sea ice?
« Reply #46 on: September 30, 2022, 09:02:10 PM »
Quote
Per the article I would expect the greatest effects of radiative forcing the entire year of 2024. Then slowly fading after that, with the studies guesstimate that effect is fully gone by 2032.

And in 2024-2025 timeframe are not only the likely El Nino but an almost certain significant Solar Maximum. Plus 2-3 more years of added CO2, NOx, SF6, etc.