Arctic Sea Ice : Forum

AGW in general => Science => Topic started by: Juan C. García on October 31, 2018, 11:28:59 PM

Title: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Juan C. García on October 31, 2018, 11:28:59 PM
I did not find this topic. I am not an expert, but it is important to have it.

Quote
Startling new research finds large buildup of heat in the oceans, suggesting a faster rate of global warming.

Over the past quarter-century, Earth’s oceans have retained 60 percent more heat each year than scientists previously had thought, said Laure Resplandy, a geoscientist at Princeton University who led the startling study published Wednesday in the journal Nature.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/10/31/startling-new-research-finds-large-buildup-heat-oceans-suggesting-faster-rate-global-warming/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/10/31/startling-new-research-finds-large-buildup-heat-oceans-suggesting-faster-rate-global-warming/)

Quote
The new research does not measure the ocean’s temperature directly. Rather, it measures the volume of gases, specifically oxygen and carbon dioxide, that have escaped the ocean in recent decades and headed into the atmosphere as it heats up. The method offered scientists a reliable indicator of ocean temperature change because it reflects a fundamental behavior of a liquid when heated.
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Hefaistos on November 01, 2018, 09:05:14 AM
This is a really important research paper with enormous policy implications. Because of the increased heat already stored in the ocean, the maximum emissions that the world can produce while still avoiding a warming of two degrees Celsius would have to be reduced by 25 percent.

“I feel like this is a triumph of Earth-system science. That we could get confirmation from atmospheric gases of ocean heat content is extraordinary,” said Joellen Russell, a professor and oceanographer at the University of Arizona. “You’ve got the A team here on this paper.”

Open access at:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0651-8.epdf?referrer_access_token=CaC3iFrPBg-kkAuZwE4xxtRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0PPM6F5Tw--xUcDaVyo5KYP7_G9gTDd9jkXQCGLmYVcdiHz9wkwN0E6N2nDZlq4WDQgItGi5ylVScf0yzGnaEVfvjiMb4AD29fhh3xQR3z_DrC_cMrTVL7ZhdR6IhWWEdbaBw61pmJWfJX3nlJ6qnYm0eEGF290YDw0L29Qu1D0Zo3ti9EtUV0eTqh8Y9w5-oUx2QwN2d9ZfvrbV8VI76Jac_wGy8vU0HDJC8kZsxCODUxL-v0-LWQnBluUpq-qsDVGV_FnsfWBY3t9eDW5Z4-YAmGWsK7U9CqUBkBPZgcWuym47_1VtxT74CJE_Bl65D2JD9IkLxfX80W9RBKrmEExeZfoxsqBGM592131t1to5g%3D%3D&tracking_referrer=www.washingtonpost.com
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: crandles on November 01, 2018, 01:13:23 PM
Quote
A higher ΔOHC will also affect the equilibrium climate sensitivity,
recently estimated at between +1.5 K and +4.5 K if CO2 is doubled1.
This estimated range reflects a decrease in the lower bound from 2 K to
1.5 K owing to downward revision of the aerosol cooling effect (in the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment
Report, as compared with the Fourth Assessment Report)1,24, but
relied on a low ΔOHC value (0.80 × 1022 J yr−1
 for 1993–2010).
An upward revision of the ocean heat gain by +0.5 × 1022 J yr−1 (to
1.30 × 1022 J yr−1  from 0.80 × 1022 J yr−1 ) would push up the lower
bound of the equilibrium climate sensitivity from 1.5 K back to 2.0 K
(stronger warming expected for given emissions), thereby reducing
maximum allowable cumulative CO2 emissions by 25% to stay within
the 2 °C global warming target (see Methods).

I wondered if this meant that it mainly affected the lower bound rather than all points on the pdf being pushed up.

James Annan is quick to respond:

Quote
I think they are just focusing on the lower bound as it provides a strong constraint on what we'd need to do to stay under 1.5 or 2C. Their revision will affect the upper bound too. Longer post coming!

and that longer post is at
https://bskiesresearch.wordpress.com/2018/11/01/that-new-ocean-heat-content-estimate/
Title: Re: ocean's heat intake larger than formerly believed
Post by: Pmt111500 on November 01, 2018, 05:19:41 PM
and this would be why Sea Ice decrease has surpassed the earlier projections. Can't say I'm surprised but it's nice to have this measured since some idiots on government-level go into extremes in their obtuseness denying crystal clear science.
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: gerontocrat on November 01, 2018, 07:45:32 PM
So what does this mean for the measurements by NOAA (which are used by vast numbers of scientists)? e.g. attached graphs
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: crandles on November 01, 2018, 08:24:49 PM
Paper is at
http://sci-hub.tw/10.1038/s41586-018-0651-8

For ocean heat content implications, Fig 1 seems the relevant graph:

Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Rod on November 02, 2018, 06:04:24 AM
So what does this mean for the measurements by NOAA (which are used by vast numbers of scientists)? e.g. attached graphs

The measurements are still the measurements and the data points are good.  The authors of the new paper simply argue that there are not enough data points to use them to generate graphs like the ones you have posted. 

They have developed a new methodology which they claim is more representative of the ocean conditions as a whole. 

The paper is very interesting.  But, the methodology is new and untested, and as time goes by other scientists will likely find fault with some of the assumptions they have made. 

The take home message is that the oceans are storing a lot of excess heat, and it is very likely more than the previous estimates.  This is one more very important study that shows we are running out of time to get carbon emissions under control. 
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Juan C. García on November 23, 2018, 11:58:54 PM
A document to read:

IUCN: International Union for Conservation of Nature
Explaining Ocean Warming: Causes, scale, effects and consequences
Edited by D. Laffoley and J. M. Baxter
September 2016


https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/2016-046_0.pdf (https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/2016-046_0.pdf)
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: kassy on January 05, 2019, 01:11:02 PM
Parts of the ocean are still cooling, study suggests

Jan. 4 (UPI) -- Most of the world's oceans are responding to global warming, but new research suggests there are still pockets of the deep ocean where ancient cooling processes continue to play out.

Scientists at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution and Harvard University determined the deep Pacific Ocean is still responding to the 16th century's Little Ice Age.

...

When researchers compared the datasets from the expeditions separated by more than a century, they found surface layers have warmed, as expected, but layers beginning roughly 1.2 miles beneath the surface have cooled.

"The close correspondence between the predictions and observed trends gave us confidence that this is a real phenomenon," said lead study author Jake Gebbie, a physical oceanographer at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.

The new findings, detailed in the journal Science, suggest the ocean absorbed as much as 30 percent less heat than previously estimated.

https://www.upi.com/Science_News/2019/01/04/Parts-of-the-ocean-are-still-cooling-study-suggests/7631546621230/

These findings imply that variations in surface climate that predate the onset of modern warming still influence how much the climate is heating up today.  Previous estimates of how much heat the Earth had absorbed during the last century assumed an ocean that started out in equilibrium at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. But Gebbie and Huybers estimate that the deep Pacific cooling trend leads to a downward revision of heat absorbed over the 20th century by about 30 percent.

"Part of the heat needed to bring the ocean into equilibrium with an atmosphere having more greenhouse gases was apparently already present in the deep Pacific,” said Huybers.

https://www.seas.harvard.edu/news/2019/01/long-memory-of-pacific-ocean
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Juan C. García on January 05, 2019, 06:51:18 PM
Thank you for the information, Kassy.  :)

I have suspicion on this study. I am not sure if it is related, but in the Hardvard link says: "This research was funded by the James E. and Barbara V. Moltz Fellowship and National Science Foundation grants OCE-1357121 and OCE-1558939". There is a James E. Moltz and Barbara Moltz living in Florida. James E. Moltz belongs to the Republican Party. Maybe I am not right making this relation, but at this time, I don't trust Republicans.

https://publicdatadigger.com/FL/vero-beach/46th-ave/123008998/James-Moltz (https://publicdatadigger.com/FL/vero-beach/46th-ave/123008998/James-Moltz)

Edit:
Just suspicious on the conclusion: "Gebbie and Huybers estimate that the deep Pacific cooling trend leads to a downward revision of heat absorbed over the 20th century by about 30 percent." On the other hand, I hope they are right.
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: vox_mundi on January 05, 2019, 08:37:58 PM
Although I agree that grants should be inspected for strings attached, i can't automatically discount research based on where the dollars came from.

My bigger issue with this research is it's reliance on comparing modern digital data with known error ranges and min/max analog underwater thermometer readings from a century ago.
Quote
... Between 1872 and 1876, scientists lowered thermometers deep into the ocean from the three-masted wooden sailing ship HMS Challenger. In the 90s, scientists with the World Ocean Circulation Experiment collected ocean temperature data from across the globe.

"We screened this historical data for outliers and considered a variety of corrections associated with pressure effects on the thermometer and stretching of the hemp rope used for lowering thermometers," said Huybers.
Their conclusions suggest a degree of certainty that exceeds the significant figures in their datasets.
Quote
... The researchers used the data from both projects to build a computer model meant to mimic the circulation of water in the Pacific Ocean over the past century and a half.

The model showed that the Pacific Ocean cooled over the course of the 20th century at depths of 1.8 to 2.6 kilometers. The amount is still not precise, but the researchers suggest it is most likely between 0.02 and 0.08° C.   
How precise and accurate were Cook's thermometer reading? +/-0.5°C?  0.1°C? 
... 0.01°C? I kinda doubt it.
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: mitch on January 05, 2019, 09:19:49 PM
Roemmich et al (2012; Nature Climate Change 1 April) give the precision of challenger thermometers to 0.1 F (0.06 C).  The cooling is at the edge of the observations. However, it matches the model prediction of a long lag time for cooling in the Pacific.
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Wherestheice on January 05, 2019, 11:10:51 PM
Yay back to BAU
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Wherestheice on January 05, 2019, 11:17:21 PM
There is other research that seems to disagree

https://www.earthmagazine.org/article/disrupting-deep-ocean-warming-reaches-abyss
https://oceanbites.org/is-the-deep-ocean-warming-too/

I have a hard time buying the claim that the deep ocean is still warming
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Juan C. García on January 06, 2019, 12:04:03 AM
Although I agree that grants should be inspected for strings attached, i can't automatically discount research based on where the dollars came from.
[/i]

I agree. It was the conclusion of the study what make me suspicious.
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: oren on January 06, 2019, 11:19:14 AM
I wouldn't be surprised if some part of the deep ocean was still responding to a surface signal from hundreds of years ago. I seem to recall that it takes 1500 years to cycle the meridional overturning circulation, though perhaps that only applies to the Atlantic.
However, if that is indeed the case, this should also be supported by Argo data. I am susprised at the reliance on problematic data when accurate data should be available for a number of years. This is admittedly far from my area of expertise (if such even exists), so - what am I missing here?
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Juan C. García on January 06, 2019, 05:05:49 PM
On a second thought, I think that my comments were too fast and careless. So I want to excuse myself to put in doubt the intentions of the study of Gebbie and Huybers and the intentions of the James E. and Barbara V. Moltz Fellowship and National Science Foundation.
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: kassy on January 06, 2019, 05:47:37 PM
Some good points by Vox_Mundi and oren.

I have a hard time seeing how the 30% reduction in absorbed heat works.

We know that the mixing of waters takes place on long time scales so that there is deep water that is cooling could be. But 0.05 is a small number and 30% feels big but i guess it´s an artefact of ocean heat modelling?

Basically all that water is below the surface so it is not really involved in absorbing current or last century heat?

Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: mitch on January 06, 2019, 05:47:54 PM
There seems to be confusion about what the Gebbie and Huybers paper said. First, Atlantic deep circulation takes a few hundred years to complete, and Pacific deep circulation takes more like a thousand years.  The Atlantic circulation is warming up because it is surface water derived, and average deep ocean temperature is going up. However, the Pacific abyss is still cooling off on average because of the lag time in deep Pacific circulation. This cooling reduces the net amount of heat stored below 2000 m.

Incidentally, fellowships are usually given to students/post docs from endowments set up at the university. The donors typically have no ability to decide who gets them.

Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Tigertown on January 07, 2019, 01:25:53 AM
You all might find a tidbit or two in this old thread: https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1612.0.html
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Juan C. García on January 07, 2019, 12:52:34 PM
You all might find a tidbit or two in this old thread: https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1612.0.html
Thank you for this link, Tigertown.
Surely I looked for the subject in Science, but I didn't look for it in Consequences. Maybe Neven can put them together.
I like it more in Science. As we can see, there is debate of how much the Oceans have been warming.
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Juan C. García on January 07, 2019, 05:27:20 PM
Another topic with the same subject. Only one post:

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 (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2016/feb/24/critical-global-ocean-monitoring-program-struggling-to-stay-afloat-without-funding-promises-warn-scientists)
Ocean warming:
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,269.msg70610.html#new (https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,269.msg70610.html#new)
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Juan C. García on January 07, 2019, 05:38:33 PM
An another one…  ;). The same, just one post:

A Met Office report on Argo/OHC has just been published at:

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/news/2016/argo-observing-the-oceans (http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/news/2016/argo-observing-the-oceans)

Some edited highlights:
Quote
During the whole of the 20th century around 0.5 million shipboard observations were collected, in contrast the Argo array is delivering around 120,000 new profiles each year and by November 2012 Argo had collected its millionth profile. The increase in the number of ocean profiles measured over the last 15 years, due to Argo, is shown in Figure 3, which also shows the significant increase in the amount of available salinity data.
UK Met Office Report on Ocean Heat Content
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1473.0.html (https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1473.0.html)
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: jai mitchell on January 12, 2019, 03:54:01 AM
I wondered if this meant that it mainly affected the lower bound rather than all points on the pdf being pushed up.

James Annan is quick to respond:

Quote
I think they are just focusing on the lower bound as it provides a strong constraint on what we'd need to do to stay under 1.5 or 2C. Their revision will affect the upper bound too. Longer post coming!

and that longer post is at
https://bskiesresearch.wordpress.com/2018/11/01/that-new-ocean-heat-content-estimate/

The post shows that the higher bounds are also raised by this analysis, however it must be noted that this higher bound is not constrained by future modeled climate system responses (changes in albedo, cloud regimes, tropical forest desiccation, etc.)

The lower AND upper constraints of the PAST climate sensitivity that these studies show are all based entirely on the uncertainty of negative forcing (cooling) currently being produced by aerosols.  Higher the aerosol effect, the greater the sensitivity.

I have posted this before to show a recent paper's results

Faero = -0.9 W/m^2 (at least)

Source: Mauritsen/Pincus 2017 
https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate3357
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Juan C. García on January 12, 2019, 05:37:54 AM
How fast are the oceans warming?
Lijing Cheng1, John Abraham2, Zeke Hausfather3, Kevin E. Trenberth4

Back to the 93%:
Quote
About 93% of the energy imbalance accumulates in the ocean as increased ocean heat content (OHC).
Quote
These recent observation-based OHC estimates show highly consistent changes since the late 1950s (see the figure). The warming is larger over the 1971–2010 period than reported in AR5. The OHC trend for the upper 2000 m in AR5 ranged from 0.20 to 0.32 W m−2 during this period (4). The three more contemporary estimates that cover the same time period suggest a warming rate of 0.36 ± 0.05 (6), 0.37 ± 0.04 (10), and 0.39 ± 0.09 (2) W m−2.

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/363/6423/128 (http://science.sciencemag.org/content/363/6423/128)
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: charles_oil on January 13, 2019, 01:08:17 AM
An easier read on the subject:

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/10/world/ocean-warming-faster/index.html (https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/10/world/ocean-warming-faster/index.html)

World's oceans absorbing 60% more heat than we thought, study says

The world's oceans are warming at an accelerated rate and are much warmer than scientists thought -- and things could get a lot worse if nothing is done to stop climate change, according to a new study.

The data, published in Thursday's edition of the journal Science, shows that the oceans have experienced consistent changes since the late 1950s and have gotten a lot warmer since the 1960s. The oceans are heating up much faster than scientists calculated in the UN assessment of climate change released in 2014. ..............

Paper referenced:
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/363/6423/128.full.pdf (http://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/363/6423/128.full.pdf)
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Wherestheice on January 13, 2019, 02:05:39 AM
The 60% number was updated and the update shows its about 40-50%, not 60%. Just wanted to point that out.
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: kassy on January 16, 2019, 12:36:16 PM
Record-breaking ocean temperatures point to trends of global warming
2018 continues record global ocean warming

An international team, released the 2018 ocean heat content observations in Advances in Atmospheric Sciences on January 16, 2019. The newly available observations show that the year 2018 is the hottest year ever recorded for the global ocean, as evident in its highest ocean heat content since 1950s in the upper 2000m.

Compared to the average value that was measured 1981 - 2010, the 2018 ocean heat anomaly is approximately 19.67 x 1022 Joules, a unit measure for heat. This heat increase in 2018 relative to 2017 is ~388 times more than the total electricity generation by China in 2017, and ~ 100 million times more than the Hiroshima bomb of heat. The years 2017, 2015, 2016 and 2014 came in just after 2018 in order of decreasing ocean heat content. The values are based on an ocean temperature analysis product conducted by the Institute of Atmospheric Physics (IAP) at Chinese Academy of Sciences.

and more on:
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2019-01/ioap-rbo011119.php
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Juan C. García on January 16, 2019, 05:34:10 PM
Record-breaking ocean temperatures point to trends of global warming
2018 continues record global ocean warming
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2019-01/ioap-rbo011119.php

Thank you Kassy.

It is interesting that we still have the North Atlantic Cold Blob (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_blob_(North_Atlantic)) that is the result of oceans melting the Greenland ice sheets (green circle added).
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: gerontocrat on January 16, 2019, 06:12:18 PM
I had a look to see what NOAA had to say about ocean heat. Attached.
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Juan C. García on February 08, 2019, 11:45:51 PM
Some studies that we already know, but a good article for the general public:

Quote
"Earth’s oceans are routinely breaking heat récords"

2018 was the hottest year ever recorded in the planet's oceans, and climate models have been accurately predicting their warming.
https://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2019/02/earths-oceans-are-routinely-breaking-heat-records/ (https://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2019/02/earths-oceans-are-routinely-breaking-heat-records/)
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: gerontocrat on March 04, 2019, 07:57:58 PM
Oceans getting warmer is one thing, but heatwaves multiplying is somewhat more scary

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/mar/04/heatwaves-sweeping-oceans-like-wildfires-scientists-reveal

Heatwaves sweeping oceans ‘like wildfires’, scientists reveal
Extreme temperatures destroy kelp, seagrass and corals – with alarming impacts for humanity

Quote
The research found heatwaves are becoming more frequent, prolonged and severe, with the number of heatwave days tripling in the last couple of years studied. In the longer term, the number of heatwave days jumped by more than 50% in the 30 years to 2016, compared with the period of 1925 to 1954.

As heatwaves have increased, kelp forests, seagrass meadows and coral reefs have been lost. These foundation species are critical to life in the ocean. They provide shelter and food to many others, but have been hit on coasts from California to Australia to Spain.

“You have heatwave-induced wildfires that take out huge areas of forest, but this is happening underwater as well,” said Dan Smale at the Marine Biological Association in Plymouth, UK, who led the research published in Nature Climate Change. “You see the kelp and seagrasses dying in front of you. Within weeks or months they are just gone, along hundreds of kilometres of coastline.”
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: dnem on March 04, 2019, 09:05:37 PM
Does that figure imply that El Nino is becoming more frequent?
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: gerontocrat on March 04, 2019, 09:39:12 PM
Does that figure imply that El Nino is becoming more frequent?
Not necessarily, but the graph in the article implies that the effect of an El Nino is increasing.
Also, the graph implies that ocean heatwaves frequency gradually increasing in non El Nino years.
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: gerontocrat on March 04, 2019, 09:51:34 PM
And global ocean heat content updated...

https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/index.html

Note how much heat heading below 700 metres.
Also note how 0-100 metres getting a bit warm.
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: vox_mundi on March 07, 2019, 04:59:49 PM
Warming Accelerating in South Pacific Ocean Bottom Waters
https://phys.org/news/2019-03-deep-robots-south-pacific-ocean.html

New research analyzing data from deep-diving ocean robots and research cruises shows that the coldest, near-bottom South Pacific waters originating from Antarctica are warming three times faster than they were in the 1990s.

... The ship-based data show that deep ocean temperatures rose an average rate of 1-thousandth of a degree Celsius per year between the 1990s and the 2000s and that rate doubled to 2-thousandths of a degree per year between the 2000s and the 2010s. The Deep Argo floats reveal a tripling of the initial warming rate to 3-thousandths of a degree per year over the past four-plus years.

This warming rate of near-bottom temperatures is only a fraction of that of the surface ocean, but is striking for an area of the ocean long considered more stable.

Sarah G. Purkey et al. Unabated Bottom Water Warming and Freshening in the South Pacific Ocean (https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/2018JC014775), Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans (2019).

Quote
... Warming is consistently found across all sections and their occupations within each basin, demonstrating the abyssal warming is monotonic, basin‐wide, and multi‐decadal.

Gregory C. Johnson et al. Deep Argo quantifies bottom water warming rates in the Southwest Pacific Basin (https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/2018GL081685), Geophysical Research Letters (2019).
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: kassy on June 27, 2019, 05:30:44 PM
Analysis: Major update to ocean-heat record could shrink 1.5C carbon budget


The corrections introduced in HadSST4 bump up ocean temperatures by around 0.1C during the past few decades.

This is a substantial adjustment to the ocean temperature record, increasing the warming of the Earth’s oceans relative to the pre-industrial (1850-1900) period by around 13%. Because oceans make up two thirds of the Earth’s surface, this has a correspondingly large impact on global surface (oceans plus land) temperature records.

While the new HadSST4 dataset has yet to be incorporated into the overall HadCRUT surface temperature record, it is used by the Cowtan and Way temperature record. Cowtan and Way  uses the same data as HadCRUT, but provides better estimates of temperatures in regions, such as the Arctic, where data is more limited. This results in a higher estimate of historical warming than the HadCRUT4 dataset

...

This analysis by Carbon Brief suggests that changes in HadSST4 will likely reduce the 1.5C carbon budget by between 24% and 33%, depending on how the budget is calculated. This means that instead of having 9-13 years of current emissions before 1.5C is exceeded, the budget only has 6-10 years left.

The HadSST4 update may effectively remove three years of emissions at the current rate from the remaining carbon budget.

This is a bit of a simplification, however, as the actual SR15 carbon budgets were based on the average of four different datasets, two of which used HadSST3 and two of which used NOAA’s ERSSTv4.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-major-update-to-ocean-heat-record-could-shrink-1-5c-carbon-budget
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Sarat on July 16, 2019, 05:42:23 PM
Can someone explain what is happening in this graph and how significant this is?

Why is the spike so huge?

Source: https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/

(https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/totalsteric_700m.png)
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: DrTskoul on July 16, 2019, 05:52:28 PM
Can someone explain what is happening in this graph and how significant this is?

Why is the spike so huge?

Source: https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/

(https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/totalsteric_700m.png)

Somebody messed up the graph??
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: gerontocrat on July 16, 2019, 06:54:28 PM
Can someone explain what is happening in this graph and how significant this is?

Why is the spike so huge?

Source: https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/


Somebody messed up the graph??
The data looks weird. Northern hemisphere increase totally out of wack?

 YEAR      WO    WOse      NH    NHse      SH    SHse
2005.125  10.818   1.869  14.000   1.736   8.586   1.962
2006.125  12.856   1.544  17.052   1.402   9.912   1.644
2007.125  13.150   1.488  16.183   1.392  11.022   1.555
2008.125  12.806   1.477  18.518   1.386   8.799   1.541
2009.125  12.912   1.408  14.474   1.452  11.816   1.377
2010.125  15.708   1.325  16.409   1.316  15.216   1.332
2011.125  12.496   1.468  12.440   1.499  12.534   1.446
2012.125  15.252   1.317  16.596   1.441  14.309   1.229
2013.125  16.324   1.201  19.803   1.246  13.882   1.169
2014.125  18.120   1.188  17.127   1.259  18.816   1.138
2015.125  19.310   1.149  17.774   1.131  20.387   1.161
2016.125  19.548   1.142  21.842   1.225  17.939   1.084
2017.125  19.976   1.072  25.355   1.125  16.202   1.034
2018.125  21.102   1.127  26.779   1.256  17.119   1.037
2019.125  32.068   1.204  50.564   1.368  19.090   1.090
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Sarat on July 16, 2019, 06:59:36 PM
Somebody messed up the graph??

Zach Labe thinks it's a calculation/instrument error as well he replied to me on twitter

Edit: gerontcrat, thank you for raw numbers

It was also present on this graph:
(https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/halosteric_2000m.png)

Hope they get it fixed, though I'm not sure what kind of resources they have there in the current administration.
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on August 19, 2019, 06:02:31 PM
If you want to know what climate change will look like, you need to know what Earth's climate looked like in the past — what air temperatures were like, for example, and what ocean currents and sea levels were doing. You need to know what polar ice caps and glaciers were up to and, crucially, how hot the oceans were.
"Most of the Earth is water," explains Peter Huybers, a climate scientist at Harvard University. "If you want to understand what global temperatures have been doing, you better understand, in detail, the rates that different parts of the ocean are warming."
https://www.npr.org/2019/08/19/750778010/how-much-hotter-are-the-oceans-the-answer-begins-with-a-bucket
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: kassy on August 19, 2019, 06:23:03 PM
That is a nice story.
That data truncation (15.1 and 15.9 both equal 15) is awful but at least it is good to know!

The newly corrected data has far-reaching implications for climate science. Sea surface temperature is a big part of every major climate model, and for decades scientists have struggled to understand how the Pacific Ocean's relatively cool temperatures in the early 20th century fit into the overall trend of a warming planet.

...

Of course, if you zoom out, a warmer Pacific isn't particularly great news for humanity. "If you correct for the Japanese measurements, then basically you would warm up the global trend," says Chan. "That actually implies or suggests that maybe the human contribution is greater than what we used to think."
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: TerryM on August 19, 2019, 09:04:55 PM
"Most of the earth is water"
Strikes me as strange in a scientific lecture.


Most of the earth might be iron, or rock, or possibly even air? - but its not water.
Terry
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Hefaistos on August 21, 2020, 09:24:03 AM
This is a really important research paper with enormous policy implications. Because of the increased heat already stored in the ocean, the maximum emissions that the world can produce while still avoiding a warming of two degrees Celsius would have to be reduced by 25 percent.

“I feel like this is a triumph of Earth-system science. That we could get confirmation from atmospheric gases of ocean heat content is extraordinary,” said Joellen Russell, a professor and oceanographer at the University of Arizona. “You’ve got the A team here on this paper.”

Open access at:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0651-8.epdf

That "really important paper" has later been - retracted!
Anyone knows why?
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: paolo on August 21, 2020, 11:13:17 AM
Hefaistos,

Retraction to: Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0651-8, published online 31 October 2018.:
" Shortly after publication, arising from comments from Nicholas Lewis, we realized that our reported uncertainties were underestimated owing to our treatment of certain systematic errors as random errors. In addition, we became aware of several smaller issues in our analysis of uncertainty. Although correcting these issues did not substantially change the central estimate of ocean warming, it led to a roughly fourfold increase in uncertainties, significantly weakening implications for an upward revision of ocean warming and climate sensitivity. Because of these weaker implications, the Nature editors asked for a Retraction, which we accept. Despite the revised uncertainties, our method remains valid and provides an estimate of ocean warming that is independent of the ocean data underpinning other approaches. The revised paper, with corrected uncertainties, will be submitted to another journal. The Retraction will contain a link to the new publication, if and when it is published."

Change history :
"12 February 2020
The revised paper, with corrected uncertainties, mentioned in the Retraction, has now been published: Resplandy, L. Quantification of ocean heat uptake from changes in atmospheric O2 and CO2 composition. Sci. Rep. 9, 20244 (2019)."


You can find the article in its new version with the following link

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-56490-z (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-56490-z)
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: vox_mundi on August 21, 2020, 11:49:48 PM
Arctic Ocean Moorings Shed Light On Winter Sea Ice Loss
https://phys.org/news/2020-08-arctic-ocean-winter-sea-ice.html

The eastern Arctic Ocean's winter ice grew less than half as much as normal during the past decade, due to the growing influence of heat from the ocean's interior, researchers have found.

(https://ams.silverchair-cdn.com/ams/content_public/journal/jcli/33/18/10.1175_jcli-d-19-0976.1/2/m_jclid190976-f1.png?Expires=1600968408&Signature=GgNWbk1ime08BMyVq7H6tDvmFWI3uzMR4HHWDeQWdELs-7oabClO-7QT2LxKfKzCLsrVWDNNciUrhwrbSzX175UvgwWRmvgvmU3WjGb8JMcwTZe9LFIlAf2CmieyxxIkTyf7ObX1BY7K~oQXPAKmlNfJXZG9sia9PJocbKFCR3jH0XzboZs6SwfPg2lw4fKOQxTEycpjp8QeYIPBRgKshhze4iUkKwwgUutAzzqN7mC818XMkZt00Nuyr7mJwHRUnuIfApgmHXJ~t5YMGwxBANj2DjTteAnKQX4VwhQRb0CyZH~6MIlnCe~teturCrHe8ipo~XoG8mvmw2USG8Vm7A__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAIE5G5CRDK6RD3PGA)

The finding came from an international study led by the University of Alaska Fairbanks and Finnish Meteorological Institute. The study, published in the Journal of Climate, used data collected by ocean moorings in the Eurasian Basin of the Arctic Ocean from 2003-2018.

The moorings measured the heat released from the ocean interior to the upper ocean and sea ice during winter. In 2016-2018, the estimated heat flux was about 10 watts per square meter, which is enough to prevent 80-90 centimeters (almost 3 feet) of sea ice from forming each year. Previous heat flux measurements were about half of that much.

"In the past, when weighing the contribution of atmosphere and ocean to melting sea ice in the Eurasian Basin, the atmosphere led," said Igor Polyakov, an oceanographer at UAF's International Arctic Research Center and FMI. "Now for the first time, ocean leads. That's a big change."

Typically, across much of the Arctic a thick layer of cold fresher water, known as a halocline, isolates the heat associated with the intruding Atlantic water from the sea surface and from sea ice.

This new study shows that an abnormal influx of salty warm water from the Atlantic Ocean is weakening and thinning the halocline, allowing more mixing. According to the new study, warm water of Atlantic origin is now moving much closer to the surface.

"The normal position of the upper boundary of this water in this region was about 150 meters. Now this water is at 80 meters,"
explained Polyakov.

(https://ams.silverchair-cdn.com/ams/content_public/journal/jcli/33/18/10.1175_jcli-d-19-0976.1/2/m_jclid190976-f11.png?Expires=1600968408&Signature=21S10hkjToB~nBXpzmaaxhc3obKVxLm-2wZKUtilKN5qDvvqplSYH6wHrrqVLTbwQ3u8iI49b6B8AV-fDVhcwWkN4l6g-jlT-tKJBGjdHHlmH4aWciUlWt1nJDZKvygFDaeMzXXt~eoPsjfrY34ZagknWLljHNJtxjmLEu-TAl7f~g3UpMXDLr~Lm4If9ihhs8RX57Mtc8n2LMfX0wpb4EBeipU9jRUnNWfD7Uyyhl7atsrMJumSw7zQf7mfn1KwB2IcbK~IZyNbIVd5oDBJ-o1HFbuZxiVA8p1kL1JaQWUw5VK87f4h8O0qOJgwGEc07Ibz5DEvDJ0w9ltK34ve-Q__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAIE5G5CRDK6RD3PGA)

A natural winter process increases this mixing. As sea water freezes, the salt is expelled from ice into the water. This brine-enriched water is heavier and sinks. In the absence of a strong halocline, the cold salty water mixes much more efficiently with the shallower, warm Atlantic water. This heat is then transferred upward to the bottom of sea ice, limiting the amount of ice that can form during winter.

Polyakov and his team hypothesize that the ocean's ability to control winter ice growth creates feedback that speeds overall sea ice loss in the Arctic. In this feedback, both declining sea ice and the weakening halocline barrier cause the ocean's interior to release heat to the surface, resulting in further sea ice loss. The mechanism augments the well-known ice-albedo feedback—which occurs when the atmosphere melts sea ice, causing open water, which in turn absorbs more heat, melting more sea ice.

When these two feedback mechanisms combine, they accelerate sea ice decline. The ocean heat feedback limits sea ice growth in winter, while the ice-albedo feedback more easily melts the thinner ice in summer.

"As they start working together, the coupling between the atmosphere, ice and ocean becomes very strong, much stronger than it was before," said Polyakov. "Together they can maintain a very fast rate of ice melt in the Arctic."

Polyakov and Rippeth collaborated on a second, associated study showing how this new coupling between the ocean, ice and atmosphere is responsible for stronger currents in the eastern Arctic Ocean.

According to that research, between 2004-2018 the currents in the upper 164 feet of the ocean doubled in strength. Loss of sea ice, making surface waters more susceptible to the effects of wind, appears to be one of the factors contributing to the increase.

The stronger currents create more turbulence, which increases the amount of mixing, known as shear, that occurs between surface waters and the deeper ocean. As described earlier, ocean mixing contributes to a feedback mechanism that further accelerates sea ice decline.

(https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/cms/asset/0023930a-70dd-48e2-9fd3-330ee68489c5/grl61024-fig-0002-m.png)

Igor V. Polyakov et al, Weakening of Cold Halocline Layer Exposes Sea Ice to Oceanic Heat in the Eastern Arctic Ocean, Journal of Climate (2020)
https://journals.ametsoc.org/jcli/article/33/18/8107/353233/Weakening-of-Cold-Halocline-Layer-Exposes-Sea-Ice

Igor V. Polyakov et al. Intensification of Near‐Surface Currents and Shear in the Eastern Arctic Ocean, Geophysical Research Letters (2020).
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2020GL089469
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Hefaistos on August 22, 2020, 09:37:36 AM
Thanks Paolo.
I attach Nic Lewis critical review as a pdf. Pretty devastating!

"If you calculate the trend correctly, the warming rate is not worse than we thought – it’s very much in line with previous estimates"

"Their claims about the effect of faster ocean warming on estimates of climate sensitivity (and hence future global warming) and carbon budgets are just incorrect anyway, but that’s a moot point now we know that about their calculation error”

Here is a link to his site as well, as there are other critical reviews by him, also another one on ocean warming by Cheng et al from 2019.

<Link to his denier site removed. kassy>
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: gerontocrat on August 22, 2020, 07:14:51 PM
I attach Nic Lewis critical review as a pdf. Pretty devastating!
Following various strands from typing "Nic Lewis" into the search engine and you get connections (including collaborations in writing articles)... to

- Judith Curry,
- Ross McKitrick -  an Associate Professor in the Economics Department at the University of Guelph, Ontario, and is affiliated with various climate inaction groups.
- Marcel Crok, THE SUPER BAD GUY OF THE CLIMATE DEBATE by Anthony Watts / March 8, 2018, <snip, N.>
- March 2014 – Nic Lewis co authors a Global Warming Policy Foundation report that takes the most optimistic paper on predicted warming from doubling of CO2 [from pre industrial levels] and without feedback.

You can add American Enterprise Institute and and and and..

So what the hell are you doing bringing this guy as an authoritative source to this forum?
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: KiwiGriff on August 22, 2020, 11:08:50 PM
Agreed gerontocrat.
Nic Lewis is well known for hand waving away any research that finds global warming a risk.
Some suggested reading for those so inclined.
 https://andthentheresphysics.wordpress.com/2014/02/01/understanding-lewis-2013/
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/02/marvel-et-al-2015-part-iii-response-to-nic-lewis/
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Hefaistos on August 23, 2020, 12:46:40 AM
...
So what the hell are you doing bringing this guy as an authoritative source to this forum?


Geron, as I said in my original post 2018, this was percieved to be a Very Important Paper: "This is a really important research paper with enormous policy implications."
It was also picked up a lot in mass media!
It was published in Nature!

Then came Nic Lewis and in essence destroyed their results. It turns out that they didn't do their calculations correctly.
Paper was RETRACTED by Nature.
After retraction came recalculations, and now their results are basically in line with previous research, as there is no statistical significance to their claim that oceans are heating faster. "...after correction, the Resplandy et al. results do not suggest a larger increase in ocean heat content than previously thought"

Geron, do you have anything to say about the science here? About the critical analysis?
Seemingly not, You prefer to just throw your petty pebbles at the messenger, who actually did a great service to the science community here.

Why don't you want to discuss the science?

We should also mention the mass media. That research was big climate news, reported in I'd say all major mass media, here are some examples:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46046067
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/31/climate/ocean-temperatures-hotter.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/10/31/startling-new-research-finds-large-buildup-heat-oceans-suggesting-faster-rate-global-warming/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-oceans-are-heating-up-faster-than-expected/ https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/01/australia/ocean-warming-report-intl/index.html http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-oceans-study-climate-change-20181031-story.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2018/11/01/oceans-more-heat-study-global-warming-climate-change-nature/1843074002/
https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change-global-warming-ocean-temperature-heat-fossil-fuels-science-research-a8612796.html

How many have published the news about the retraction and that results are now in line with previous research?
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Hefaistos on August 23, 2020, 12:49:30 AM
Agreed gerontocrat.
Nic Lewis is well known for hand waving away any research that finds global warming a risk.
Some suggested reading for those so inclined.
 https://andthentheresphysics.wordpress.com/2014/02/01/understanding-lewis-2013/
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/02/marvel-et-al-2015-part-iii-response-to-nic-lewis/

And who is doing the hand waving here?

Do you have anything to say about the science here?
About the critical analysis?
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: KiwiGriff on August 23, 2020, 01:43:32 AM
I never bother following links to whack fringe sites as it gives them  traffic they dont deserve .
Nic Lewis is not an authority and his blog posts are not science so do not need examination.
I did follow your links to the MSM.
According to you
Quote
How many have published the news about the retraction and that results are now in line with previous research?
From your first two links.
Quote
Errors have been found in a recent study suggesting the oceans were soaking up more heat than previously estimated.

The initial report suggested that the seas have absorbed 60% more than previously thought.

But a re-examination by a mathematician showed that the margin of error was larger than in the published study.

The authors have acknowledged the problem and have submitted a correction to the journal.
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-46046067
Quote
Editors’ Note: November 14, 2018

An earlier version of this article included a conclusion from a study about ocean warming that is now in doubt. The researchers are working to revise their study because of errors detected in their calculations and it appears unlikely that they will be able to support their original conclusion that the oceans have warmed an average of 60 percent more per year than the current official estimates by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The sections of the article dealing with that conclusion have been removed and the headline has been updated.

Update: Sept. 26, 2019: Nature, the journal which initially published the study last year, announced on Wednesday that it was retracting the paper.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/31/climate/ocean-temperatures-hotter.html

You have just been publicly Pawned for gibbering nonsense.
I will bet your list came unchecked from some fringe crank site and like many deniers you never bothered to check what your links actually said  instead believed your crank source unconditionally.

Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: kinbote on August 23, 2020, 03:19:04 AM
...
Then came Nic Lewis and in essence destroyed their results. It turns out that they didn't do their calculations correctly.
Paper was RETRACTED by Nature.
After retraction came recalculations, and now their results are basically in line with previous research, as there is no statistical significance to their claim that oceans are heating faster. "...after correction, the Resplandy et al. results do not suggest a larger increase in ocean heat content than previously thought"
...
High-profile ocean warming paper to get a correction
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/11/high-profile-ocean-warming-paper-get-correction

The overall conclusion that oceans are trapping more and more heat mirrors other studies and is not inaccurate, but the margin of error in the study is larger than originally thought, said Ralph Keeling, a professor of geosciences at Scripps and co-author of the paper.

"These problems do not invalidate the methodology or the new insights into ocean biogeochemistry on which it is based, but they do influence the mean rate of warming we infer, and more importantly, the uncertainties of that calculation," said Keeling in a statement on RealClimate.org.

"The more important message is that our study lacks the accuracy to narrow the range of previous estimates of ocean uptake," Keeling said in an email. He thanked Lewis for pointing out the anomaly.

In the past, scientific debates about climate science have prompted skeptics to attack mainstream climate science generally. Some climate scientists said they are concerned that could happen again in this case and the outcome wildly misinterpreted.

When asked about the response of skeptics, climate scientist Michael Mann of Pennsylvania State University in State College said, "We can't worry about that."

"We have to just call it as we see it, do good science, put it out there, defend it and, when necessary, correct it. That's the legitimate scientific process, and it stands in stark contrast to the tactics employed by the forces of pseudoscience and antiscience," Mann said.

This morning the website Climate Depot, which frequently targets mainstream climate science, sent out an email with the headline, "Skeptic review dismantles study."


----

Sounds familiar. Also, I'm not sure I understand the argument that Mass Media ignored the retraction and resubmission of this Very Important Paper, particularly when I checked the first three links you shared and all had updates on the retraction, and two had links to updated stories with more information.

Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Hefaistos on August 23, 2020, 08:20:17 AM
I never bother following links to whack fringe sites as it gives them  traffic they dont deserve .
Nic Lewis is not an authority and his blog posts are not science so do not need examination.

In this case he is, as it is only due to Nic Lewis' critical review that this Seemingly Very Important Paper got retracted from Nature, one of the leading science journals. On top of that Prof. Keeling himself taking the blame. At least he had the manners to thank Nic Lewis for his help in finding the faults in that research

Quote
I did follow your links to the MSM.

The links were just a sample to show how the results of the paper were widely published. The list was from Nic Lewis site.
In addition, I asked a question, how many of them that published a retraction notice. Yes, some of them did. Some of them certainly didn't.

Quote
You have just been publicly Pawned for gibbering nonsense.
I will bet your list came unchecked from some fringe crank site and like many deniers you never bothered to check what your links actually said  instead believed your crank source unconditionally.

Please, Kiwigriff. We are not in the Forum Decorum sandpit thread now! We are in the Science section, discussing a major scientific paper that has been retracted from a top notch journal due to the researchers not being able to make some rather basic calculations correctly. It's pretty scandalous what has happened, not least due to how widely publicized those results were!

You, however, have totally nothing substantial to say about the issue itself. You say that it is "nonsense". Indeed?
Your major quest seems to be to try to scandalize me for bringing this up.
That's pretty sad.
I think that there should be room for scientific discussions in the Science forum of ASIF?

Finally, you accuse me of being a 'denier'. No, I'm not a 'denier', I'm just a realist. I have my Ph.D. and my critical mind, and I don't believe in climate alarmism any more.
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Simon on August 23, 2020, 08:44:21 AM
As a reminder.

For ocean temperatures https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-ocean-heat-content

Nice visuals here https://www.seatemperature.org/

Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: kassy on August 23, 2020, 09:51:42 AM
So Lewis is a denier but he did play a role in the retraction of this paper.

I will remove the link to his site from the post above but i will leave the pdf attached.
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Hefaistos on August 23, 2020, 01:35:49 PM
So Lewis is a denier but he did play a role in the retraction of this paper.

I will remove the link to his site from the post above but i will leave the pdf attached.

The inquisitor came up with the verdict, and poor Nic's head is chopped. Why does this make me think about the queen of hearts in the Alice in wonderland fairytale?

Seriously, I don't think it's correct to define Lewis as a 'denier'. He has never denied AGW and the effect of GHG, afaik. He is a skeptic when it comes to how strong the climate feedbacks are, e.g. as measured by the ECS or the TCR, where he claims values are likely in the lower end of the ranges set by IPCC.
E.g. in this youtube talk, where he assigns ECS values somewhere around 1.7. Does that make him a denier?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYZW-6jw98U
I find everything he says in that presentation perfectly reasonable, and very interesting.

I don't think it should qualify anyone to be labeled a denier who just disputes the strength of feedbacks, when the discussion is still well within the limits set by the IPCC. At least as long as the IPCC is unable to narrow down the ECS range, and no-one in the science community can be very sure about the correct values.

So, what exactly is it that makes Nic Lewis a 'denier'?
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Hefaistos on August 23, 2020, 02:14:40 PM
....
You can add American Enterprise Institute and and and and..

So what the hell are you doing bringing this guy as an authoritative source to this forum?


While in the Science (!) forum, maybe it should also be mentioned that poor head-chopped Nic also had a paper published in a VERY well renowned climate science journal:

" An Objective Bayesian Improved Approach for Applying Optimal Fingerprint Techniques to Estimate Climate Sensitivity"
Nicholas Lewis
J. Climate (2013) 26 (19): 7414–7429.
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00473.1

Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: kassy on August 23, 2020, 05:17:11 PM
So Lewis is a denier but he did play a role in the retraction of this paper.

I will remove the link to his site from the post above but i will leave the pdf attached.
I find everything he says in that presentation perfectly reasonable, and very interesting.

So, what exactly is it that makes Nic Lewis a 'denier'?

His link to the Global Warming Policy Foundation.

The YT talk is questioning if going zero carbon by 2050 is needed.

His general career.

Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Neven on August 23, 2020, 06:13:26 PM
Nic Lewis is a climate risk denier. There is no doubt about it. He believes there are no serious risks to global warming. He's not stupid, though.

Hefaistos is not a climate risk denier. He made his point, but there's absolutely no need to turn Nic Lewis into Galileo.

Does that about sum it up?
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on August 23, 2020, 07:35:42 PM
If you say there are no risks to AGW then I guess you are a denier.
On the other hand, I deny Sam Carana's projection of 18° C warming by 2026 and human extinction, but that does not make me a Denier.
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: KiwiGriff on August 23, 2020, 08:10:01 PM
<Snip. Let's not make Hefaistos the centre of attention and stay on-topic; N.>
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: kassy on September 20, 2020, 11:12:43 AM
Climate change: Earthquake 'hack' reveals scale of ocean warming

Scientists have found a clever new way of measuring ocean warming, using sound waves from undersea earthquakes.

The researchers say the "hack" works because sound travels faster in warmer water.

The team looked at sonic data from the Indian Ocean emitted by tremors over a 10-year period.

As the seas have warmed due to global heating, the scientists have seen the sound waves increase in speed.

Their new method shows the decadal warming trend in the Indian Ocean was far higher than previous estimates.

...

The scientists examined data from over 4,000 tremors that occurred in the Indian Ocean between 2004 and 2016.

...

The team then looked for pairs of "repeaters", earthquakes with almost identical origins and power.

By measuring how long these slow-moving signals took to travel across the waters from Indonesia to a monitoring station on the island of Diego Garcia, they were able to work out the changes in temperature for the whole of the ocean over the 10-year period.

"It takes sound waves about half an hour to travel from Sumatra to Diego Garcia," lead author Dr Wenbo Wu from the California Institute of Technology told BBC News.

"The temperature change of the deep ocean between Sumatra and Diego Garcia causes this half-hour travel time to vary by a few tenths of a second.

"Because we can measure these variations very accurately, we can infer the small changes in the average temperature of the deep ocean, in this case about a tenth of a degree."

...

In their research, the scientists showed that warming in the Indian Ocean over the decade that they studied was greater than previously estimated.

However, the paper has some important caveats.

"It is important to emphasise that this is a result that applies to this particular region and this particular decade," said Dr Wu.

"We need to apply our method in many more regions and over different time frames to evaluate whether there is any systematic under- or over-estimation of the deep-ocean trend globally.

"It is much too early to draw any conclusions in this direction."

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-54193334
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: vox_mundi on September 25, 2020, 06:51:24 PM
Major Wind-Driven Ocean Currents Are Shifting Toward the Poles
https://phys.org/news/2020-09-major-wind-driven-ocean-currents-shifting.html

(https://scx2.b-cdn.net/gfx/news/2020/5f6e116a374d5.jpg)
"Satellite observational sea surface temperature anomaly during the last five years (2015-2019), reference to the first five years (1982-1986)". Credit: Alfred-Wegener-Institut/Gerrit Lohmann

The severe droughts in the USA and Australia are the first sign that the tropics, and their warm temperatures, are apparently expanding in the wake of climate change. But until now, scientists have been unable to conclusively explain the reasons for this, because they were mostly focusing on atmospheric processes. Now, experts at the AWI have solved the puzzle: the alarming expansion of the tropics is not caused by processes in the atmosphere, but quite simply by warming subtropical ocean.

To date, experts assumed that processes in the atmosphere played a major role—for instance a change in the ozone concentration or the aerosols. It was also thought possible that the natural climate fluctuations that occur every few decades were responsible for the expansion of the tropics. For many years researchers had been looking in the wrong place, so to speak.

"Our simulations show that an enhanced warming over the subtropical ocean in both the Northern and Southern Hemispheres are the main drivers," says Hu Yang, the study's lead author. These subtropical warming patterns are generated by the dynamic of subtropical ocean gyres, measuring several hundreds of kilometers in diameter, which rotate slowly. These currents are especially well-known in the Pacific, because the majority of floating marine litter is concentrated in them. "Because the currents in the region bring together the surface warming water masses particularly intensely, it's easier for the subtropical ocean surface to accumulate warmth than in other regions—and the same applies to plastic," says Lohmann. As a result of this warming of the subtropical ocean, the tropical warm ocean regions are expanding. According to his calculations, this phenomenon is the catalyst for the tropics expanding to the north and south. "Previous researchers had been taking an overly complicated approach to the problem, and assumed it was due to complex changes in the atmosphere. In reality, it's due to a relatively simple mechanism involving ocean currents."

What led the experts to explore this avenue: data on ocean gyres that they happened to come across five years ago—data on ocean temperatures and satellite-based data, freely available on databases. Both sources indicated that the gyres were becoming warmer and more powerful. "That's what led us to believe that they might be a decisive factor in the expansion of the tropics," explains Hu Yang.

The AWI experts were right: their findings perfectly correspond to actual observations and the latest field data on tropical expansion. Just like in reality, their climate model shows that the tropics are now stretching farther to the north and south alike. In the Southern Hemisphere, the effect is even more pronounced, because the ocean takes up more of the overall area there than in the Northern Hemisphere.

(https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/cms/asset/28a811c5-c302-4e2d-a720-58bafb129a05/jgrd56409-fig-0006-m.jpg)

Hu Yang et al, Tropical Expansion Driven by Poleward Advancing Midlatitude Meridional Temperature Gradients, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres (2020)
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2020JD033158
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: morganism on October 19, 2020, 01:00:25 AM
"The SST changes in the mid- and high-latitudes of the northern Hemisphere during the past 10 years have been dramatic. Just a random sample today looking at other moderate (or stronger) #LaNina events, and it is stunning to compare Oct 2010 to 2020."

https://twitter.com/EricBlake12/status/1317578721226784771
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: oren on October 19, 2020, 05:44:25 AM
Thanks morganism, just posting the images. 2020 top, 2010 bottom.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ekj63MrWAAYlBIa?format=jpg&name=medium)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ekj63MqX0AAX70w?format=jpg&name=medium)
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: kassy on January 13, 2021, 06:08:51 PM
Upper Ocean Temperatures Hit Record High in 2020

...

The most recent data indicate that the OHC in the upper 2000 m layer of the world’s oceans has increased with a mean rate of 5.7 ± 1.0 ZJ yr−1 for the 1958−2020 period (IAP/CAS) (Fig. 1). There is a more rapid increase in OHC that began ~1980s and has continued unabated since then (Fig. 1). Since 1986, the average annual increase is 9.1 ± 0.3 ZJ yr−1 (1986 to
2020), almost eight times larger than the linear rate from 1958~1985 (1.2 ± 0.6 ZJ yr−1). Further, the uncertainty has decreased as improved instruments (e.g., Argo) and analysis methods have become available (Cheng et al., 2017; Argo,
2020) (Fig. 1). Moreover, each decade has been warmer than its preceding decade.
The 2020 OHC value is higher than the last year’s value, by 20 ± 8.3 ZJ using the IAP/CAS data, and by 1 ± 3.5 ZJ
using NOAA/NCEI. Both are the highest on record (Table 1). Differences between the OHC analyses reflect the uncertainties in the calculation due to method and data coverage. OHC values herein are preliminary and will be augmented by ocean
profile data which are not immediately available at the end of the year (but added later), and by calibration and quality control processes which also occur on longer time scales. Further quantification of the uncertainties in OHC will help to better
specify the confidence in OHC assessment.

...

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00376-021-0447-x
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on January 20, 2021, 10:41:34 PM
Climate change pushed ocean temperatures to record high in 2020, study finds
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-18/ocean-temperatures-reached-record-high-in-2020-study-finds/13062628
Quote
Last year the world's oceans absorbed 20 zettajoules of heat
Higher ocean temperatures can lead to an increase in extreme weather
Seas are warming at twice the global average in Australia's south-east
Title: Re: Ocean temperatures
Post by: kassy on January 23, 2021, 05:23:00 PM
Antarctica: The ocean cools at the surface but warms up at depth

Scientists have concluded that the slight cooling observed at the surface of the Southern Ocean hides a rapid and marked warming of the waters, to a depth of up to 800 meters. These results were obtained thanks to unique data acquired over the past 25 years.

...

The study points to major changes around the polar ice cap where temperatures are increasing by 0.04°C per decade, which could have serious consequences for Antarctic ice. Warm water is also rising rapidly to the surface, at a rate of 39 metres per decade, i.e. between three and ten times more than previously estimated.

Published in Nature Communications on 21 January 2021, these results were obtained thanks to unique data acquired over the past 25 years on board the French Antarctic resupply vessel L'Astrolabe. This is the longest series of temperature records in the Southern Ocean covering north to south.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/01/210121131818.htm

Southern Ocean in-situ temperature trends over 25 years emerge from interannual variability

Abstract
Despite playing a major role in global ocean heat storage, the Southern Ocean remains the most sparsely measured region of the global ocean. Here, a unique 25-year temperature time-series of the upper 800 m, repeated several times a year across the Southern Ocean, allows us to document the long-term change within water-masses and how it compares to the interannual variability. Three regions stand out as having strong trends that dominate over interannual variability: warming of the subantarctic waters (0.29 ± 0.09 °C per decade); cooling of the near-surface subpolar waters (−0.07 ± 0.04 °C per decade); and warming of the subsurface subpolar deep waters (0.04 ± 0.01 °C per decade). Although this subsurface warming of subpolar deep waters is small, it is the most robust long-term trend of our section, being in a region with weak interannual variability. This robust warming is associated with a large shoaling of the maximum temperature core in the subpolar deep water (39 ± 09 m per decade), which has been significantly underestimated by a factor of 3 to 10 in past studies. We find temperature changes of comparable magnitude to those reported in Amundsen–Bellingshausen Seas, which calls for a reconsideration of current ocean changes with important consequences for our understanding of future Antarctic ice-sheet mass loss.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-20781-1