Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Global Surface Air Temperatures  (Read 859502 times)

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #900 on: April 08, 2016, 05:10:35 PM »
Nick Stokes provides TempLS mesh data indicating that March 2016 was 0.086C cooler than February 2016:

http://moyhu.blogspot.com/2016/04/surface-templs-down-0086-in-march-still.html

Extract: "TempLS mesh, reported here (as of 8 April, 4359 stations), was down from 1.074°C in Feb to 0.988 in March (base 1961-90). This is comparable to the drop in the TLT satellite indices, and greater than the NCEP/NCAR index (0.057). TempLS grid dropped by only 0.037°C, which is similar to NCEP/NCAR. The TempLS anomaly is the second highest in the record, after February."

See also:
http://www.moyhu.blogspot.com.au/p/latest-ice-and-temperature-data.html#mesh
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

skanky

  • New ice
  • Posts: 63
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #901 on: April 11, 2016, 04:52:11 PM »
GST relative to "pre-industrial" (1850-1900 baseline):



From Ed Hawkins at Climate Lab Book
http://www.climate-lab-book.ac.uk/2016/global-temperature-changes-since-1850/

James Lovejoy

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 160
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #902 on: April 14, 2016, 05:19:58 AM »
With either data or forecasts for 2/3 of April (Stokes and karstenhaustein) the anomaly has dropped to "only" 0.661.

If the rest of April follows this pattern then April will probably end up with an anomaly just above January's, but too close to predict whether it will be just above or just below January's anomaly.

In any case very likely another record warmth for the month.

James Lovejoy

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 160
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #903 on: April 14, 2016, 05:04:08 PM »
Japan has reported for March.  Anomaly 0.62 (1981-2010 baseline).

This ties Japan's February anomaly for second highest on record (December 2015 was reported as 0.66).  However, according to their data, March's temperature anomaly was the greatest vs the 20th century average (1.07 vs 1.04 for both December 2015 and February).




wili

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3342
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 602
  • Likes Given: 409
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #904 on: April 14, 2016, 08:05:31 PM »
rs is on it: https://robertscribbler.com/2016/04/14/too-close-to-dangerous-climate-thresholds-japan-meteorological-agency-shows-first-three-months-of-2015-were-about-1-5-c-above-the-ipcc-preindustrial-baseline/

Too Close to Dangerous Climate Thresholds — Japan Meteorological Agency Shows First Three Months of 2016 Were About 1.5 C Above the IPCC Preindustrial Baseline

Quote
We should take a moment to appreciate how hot it’s actually been so far in 2016. To think about what it means to be in a world that’s already so damn hot. To think about how far behind the 8 ball we are on responses to human forced climate change. And to consider how urgent it is to swiftly stop burning coal, oil and gas. To stop adding more fuel to an already raging global fire.

******

Global policy makers, scientists, and many environmentalists have identified an annual average of 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrial marks as a level of heat we should try to avoid. The Paris Climate Summit made a verbal pledge to at least attempt to steer clear of such extreme high temperature ranges. But even the strongest emissions reduction commitments from the nations of the world now do not line up with that pledge. And it’s questionable that they ever could given the massive amount of greenhouse gas overburden that has already accumulated and is already rapidly heating the world’s airs, waters, ice, and carbon stores.

Current emission reduction pledges, though significant when taking into context the size and potential for growth of all of carbon-spewing industry, don’t even come close to the stated 1.5 C goal. Under our presently accepted understanding of climate sensitivity, and barring any response from the global carbon stores unforeseen by mainstream science, pledged reductions in fossil fuel use by the nations of the world under Paris would limit warming to around 3 C by the end of this Century. Rates of carbon emission reduction would necessarily have to significantly speed up beyond the pledged Paris NDC goals in order to hit below 3 C by 2100 — much less avoid 2 C.

As for 1.5 C above preindustrial averages — it already appears that this year, 2016, will see temperatures uncomfortably close to a level that mainstream scientists have identified as dangerous.
"A force de chercher de bonnes raisons, on en trouve; on les dit; et après on y tient, non pas tant parce qu'elles sont bonnes que pour ne pas se démentir." Choderlos de Laclos "You struggle to come up with some valid reasons, then cling to them, not because they're good, but just to not back down."

BornFromTheVoid

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1339
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 679
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #905 on: April 15, 2016, 05:54:50 PM »
GISS data for March is out, and at +1.28C above the 51-80 average, March has set a new record, beating the previous record set in 2010 by +0.36C. It is also +0.67C above the March 1998 value.



Meanwhile, the rolling 12 month anomaly is now up to +0.96C.

I recently joined the twitter thing, where I post more analysis, pics and animations: @Icy_Samuel

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #906 on: April 15, 2016, 10:44:07 PM »
The two images are from the linked Climate Central article about recent LOTI Temp Anom values from NASA (I do not know why the first image shows March 2016 as warmer than Feb 2016, as this is not the case).  The second image shows Jan thru March LOTI Temp Anoms around the world; and this map makes me wonder what the LOTI values would have been if there weren't so much ice sheet meltwater cooling both the North Atlantic and the Southern Ocean (as the impact of this meltwater was not included in the AR5 projections).  If the ice sheet meltwater discharge accelerates in coming decades, policy makers could claim victory for reducing LOTI (due to ocean surface cooling) at the same time that Earth Energy Imbalance (EEI) values are accelerating rapidly:

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/earth-sees-11-record-hot-months-20254

Extract: "The past 11 months have been the hottest such months in 135 years of recordkeeping, a streak that has itself set a record and puts in clear terms just how much the planet has warmed due to the buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

crandles

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3379
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 81
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #907 on: April 16, 2016, 01:11:47 AM »
Quote
Extract: "The past 11 months have been the hottest such months in 135 years of recordkeeping, a streak that has itself set a record and puts in clear terms just how much the planet has warmed due to the buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere."

That claim seems a bit odd:
Sept 15 82
Sept 14 90
Aug 15 78
Aug 14 81
July 15 73
July  11 74
June 15 at 78 does look record warmest June
May 15 78
May 14 76

So I make it each of last 6 months were hottest for that month on record and 7 of last 11 months.

The 11 months as one period obviously is the hottest such period but then why 11 months? 12 month periods makes more sense and is still obviously a record.

Last 16 12 month periods have each been hotter than the hottest such 12 month periods up to end of 2013. That seems a more sensible claim to make.


Edit: Graph is of year to date temperatures - That is why it continues upwards average of 113 134 and 128 (125) is higher than average of 113 and 134 (123.5). Claim doesn't say it is of year to date figures (ie comparing different length periods) so I think it is wrong but 11 months seems to be taken by looking at that graph.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2016, 01:22:06 AM by crandles »

BenB

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 283
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #908 on: April 16, 2016, 10:58:44 AM »
I think that NOAA said that February was the 10th consecutive monthly record, so I suspect that that the 11 month claim comes from adding March to that number, although they're different data sets.

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #909 on: April 16, 2016, 11:19:01 PM »
The link article quotes Michael Mann as being uncomfortable with the high March GMST value and encouraging world leaders to accelerate their efforts to reduce anthropogenic carbon emissions (although I note that: (1) an abrupt reduction in aerosol emissions could lead to continuing global warming despite reductions in carbon emissions; (2) the observed GMST values are certainly biased by the cool spots in the North Atlantic and the Southern Ocean associated with ice mass loss; and (3) our current positive PDO cycle means that El Ninos (and their release of heat stored in the ocean) will almost certainly be more frequent and intense for the next 20 to 30 years).

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/apr/15/march-temperature-smashes-100-year-global-record?CMP=share_btn_tw

Extract: "Prof Michael Mann, a climate scientist at Penn State University in the US, responded to the March data by saying: “Wow. I continue to be shocked by what we are seeing.” He said the world had now been hovering close to the threshold of “dangerous” warming for two months, something not seen before.
“The [new data] is a reminder of how perilously close we now are to permanently crossing into dangerous territory,” Mann said. “It underscores the urgency of reducing global carbon emissions.”
The Met Office, along with the US agencies Nasa and Noaa, keep the most-used global temperature records and will release their assessment of March temperatures later this month. But the JMA records have shown the same trends as these in the past."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #910 on: April 17, 2016, 12:19:31 AM »
Nick Stokes provides the following summary (to date) about the March 2016 GMST, and provides the attached plot comparing 97-98 and 15 thru March 16 GISS values.  Note that in the extract below Stokes estimates that NOAA's value for March may be closer to February's value than NASA reported for the GISS values:

http://moyhu.blogspot.com/2016/04/march-giss-down-006-hottest-march-in.html

Extract: "GISS in March is out. The global average anomaly was 1.28°C; down 0.06°C from Feb, but by a long way the warmest March in the record (Sou has details, note the YTD map). The result is very close to TempLS mesh, which now shows a 0.04°C drop. TempLS rose quite a lot since announced; commenter Olof thinks that Sudan data pushed it up. The NCEP/NCAR index also dropped by 0.057°C. TempLS grid (Mar) is now down by only 0.014°C from Feb, which suggests that NOAA's March figure may be very close to Feb."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #911 on: April 17, 2016, 05:42:23 PM »
The attached SkS 2C tracker thru March 2016, shows that the 12-month running average LOTI value is now up to 1.21C and climbing:
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

James Lovejoy

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 160
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #912 on: April 19, 2016, 05:39:36 PM »
NOAA state of the climate reports a March anomaly higher than February's (by 0.02F) and 2.20F above the twentieth century average.

More to follow.


AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #913 on: April 19, 2016, 05:57:43 PM »
NOAA state of the climate reports a March anomaly higher than February's (by 0.02F) and 2.20F above the twentieth century average.

More to follow.

Here is a link to NOAA's State of the Climate report.  The attached images for March 2016 shows what James is referring to, and the second plot makes it clear that the GMST values are depressed by the cold spots in both the North Atlantic, and the Southern, Oceans due to ice sheet melting:

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201603

Edit: Extract: "The combined average temperature over global land and ocean surfaces for March 2016 was the highest for this month in the 1880–2016 record, at 1.22°C (2.20°F) above the 20th century average of 12.7°C (54.9°F). This surpassed the previous record set in 2015 by 0.32°C / (0.58°F), and marks the highest monthly temperature departure among all 1,635 months on record, surpassing the previous all-time record set just last month by 0.01°C (0.02°F). Overall, the nine highest monthly temperature departures in the record have all occurred in the past nine months. March 2016 also marks the 11th consecutive month a monthly global temperature record has been broken, the longest such streak in NOAA's 137 years of record keeping. "
« Last Edit: April 19, 2016, 06:15:50 PM by AbruptSLR »
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

James Lovejoy

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 160
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #914 on: April 19, 2016, 06:40:54 PM »
Some  other notable items in the report:

By NOAA's record this is the 11th consecutive month a monthly temperature record has been broken, the longest streak in its 137 year record.

The March satellite temperature was also highest in the satellite record according to both UAH 5.6 (1.53F) and RSS (1.33F).

Jan-March was 1.15C (2.07F) above the 20th century average, surpassing Jan-March 1998 by 0.45C (0.81F) and surpassing the 2nd warmest Jan-March (2015) by 0.28°C (0.50°F).

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #915 on: April 20, 2016, 04:38:50 PM »
The linked articles provide additional color commentary on how March continued our current streak of exceptional global warming.  Nevertheless, it seems scientifically naïve (and potentially dangerous) to continue ignoring the impact of the SSTA cold spots in both the North Atlantic, and the Southern, Oceans associated with ice sheet melting in Greenland and Antarctica, respectively, on the reported GMST values:

http://mashable.com/2016/04/19/march-record-warm/#.rxkY.injEqP
http://www.climatecentral.org/news/march-continues-streak-exceptional-global-warmth-20258

Edit: See also (and associated images):
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/04/19/3770884/noaa-hottest-march/
https://tamino.wordpress.com/2016/04/19/noaa-hottest/
« Last Edit: April 20, 2016, 05:02:41 PM by AbruptSLR »
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #916 on: April 20, 2016, 05:38:25 PM »
Nick Stokes provides the linked article & compares both the NOAA and the Hadley center temperature anom. comparisons with 1997-98, both indicating that our current case is much worse than during the most recent past Super El Nino:

http://moyhu.blogspot.com/2016/04/noaa-global-index-still-rising-new.html

Extract: "Most indices dropped slightly from record February values. But as expected, the global NOAA index held up, and was even slightly warner, at 1.22°C vs 1.19 in Feb. That is the highest anomaly in the record for any month.

HADsst3 is out too, with a rise, which is interesting. February SST dropped, causing some chatter about rapid El Nino decline, but this was premature."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #918 on: April 21, 2016, 01:35:56 AM »
Due to my concern that the cold spots in the North Atlantic, and the Southern, Oceans are biasing the recent GMST anom, I provide the following linked NOAA Global Land Temperature Anomalies since the beginning of 2015; which show a much higher rate of acceleration of temperatures for February & March 2016:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/time-series/global/globe/land/p12/12/1880-2016.csv

Units: Degrees Celsius
Base Period: 1901-2000
Year,     Value
201501,1.3869
201502,1.6914
201503,1.6237
201504,1.0811
201505,1.2247
201506,1.2353
201507,0.9459
201508,1.1241
201509,1.1514
201510,1.3093
201511,1.2969
201512,1.8783
201601,1.5675
201602,2.2665
201603,2.3305
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #919 on: April 22, 2016, 07:14:25 PM »
Due to my concern that the cold spots in the North Atlantic, and the Southern, Oceans are biasing the recent GMST anom, I provide the following linked NOAA Global Land Temperature Anomalies since the beginning of 2015; which show a much higher rate of acceleration of temperatures for February & March 2016:

The first image shows Karsten Haustein's 2m Temp Anom forecast issued April 22 and valid to April 29 2016; which shows the NH Temp Anom increasing while the SH Temp Anom is plunging.

The second image shows the CCI-Reanalyzer SH 2m Temp Anom 5-day forecast issued April 22 2016, showing that the West Antarctic is anomalously warm while most of the 2m surface temp above the Southern Ocean (other than in the West Antarctic) is dominated by cold spots.

The third image shows the nullschool Earth SSTA & Current Map centered on Antarctica for April 22 2016, showing that essentially the entire surface of the Southern Ocean is anomalously cool.

I am concerned that ice shelf meltwater is rapidly cooling the surface of the Southern Ocean which will likely suppress the April 2016 GMST anom well below what Earth Energy Imbalance measurement would indicate (i.e. if we were to consider the increasing ocean heat content shown in the fourth image).
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

James Lovejoy

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 160
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #920 on: April 24, 2016, 01:47:31 AM »
Between Nick Stokes's calculated Temperatures, and Karsten Haustein's projected Temperatures, we have an estimate of April's anomaly.

Best estimate is that April's GISS anomaly is 0.14C less than March's.  That would give an anomaly of 1.14C, higher than any before 2016, but just about tied for the lowest 2016 anomaly.

Gavin Schmidt of NASA has said there's a 99% chance that 2016 will be the hottest year on record.  The big question is how much hotter than 2015.  Right now it looks like the answer is a lot hotter.

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #921 on: April 24, 2016, 02:20:50 AM »
Between Nick Stokes's calculated Temperatures, and Karsten Haustein's projected Temperatures, we have an estimate of April's anomaly.

Best estimate is that April's GISS anomaly is 0.14C less than March's.  That would give an anomaly of 1.14C, higher than any before 2016, but just about tied for the lowest 2016 anomaly.

Gavin Schmidt of NASA has said there's a 99% chance that 2016 will be the hottest year on record.  The big question is how much hotter than 2015.  Right now it looks like the answer is a lot hotter.

For those disinclined to visit the linked NASA GISS website, I provide the following monthly GISS anom values for 2015 & 2016 (baselined to 1951-1980).  If James is approximately correct on estimating the April GISS anom monthly value then, at the end of April, in the 12-month running average GISS anom value of 0.73C will be replaced by 1.14C:

Year   Jan  Feb  Mar  Apr  May  Jun  Jul  Aug  Sep  Oct  Nov  Dec
2015    81   87   90   73   78    78    73   78   82   106  102  110
2016   113 134 128  *** ***  ***  ***  *** *** ***  ***  ***

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

Edit: The preindustrial baseline adjustment is 0.256C (this is the difference between the GISS baseline and the 1880-1909 preindustrial baseline)
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

BornFromTheVoid

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1339
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 679
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #922 on: April 24, 2016, 01:22:21 PM »
Provided the GISS anomaly for April is at least +1.1C, the rest of the year could average colder than the coldest month of 2015 and still achieve the record warmest year.
I recently joined the twitter thing, where I post more analysis, pics and animations: @Icy_Samuel

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #923 on: April 24, 2016, 02:34:02 PM »
Provided the GISS anomaly for April is at least +1.1C, the rest of the year could average colder than the coldest month of 2015 and still achieve the record warmest year.

Furthermore, if James is correct,  then the 12-month running average LOTI value will increase from 1.21C at the end of March up to 1.25C by the end of April.  Also, if the ENSO ends-up being neutral by the end of the year then we could end-up above Gavin Schmidt's mean projected value of +1.32C at the end of Dec 2016.
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

crandles

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3379
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 81
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #924 on: April 24, 2016, 04:05:29 PM »
Also, if the ENSO ends-up being neutral by the end of the year then we could end-up above Gavin Schmidt's mean projected value of +1.32C at the end of Dec 2016.


https://tamino.wordpress.com/2016/01/29/correcting-for-more-than-just-el-nino/
Quote
corrected for more than just el Niño; I’ve adjusted for solar variations and volcanic aerosols too



Trend at about .75C above 1951-1980.

Enso effect is only fairly small part of discrepancy: a few estimates at around .1C so unlikely to be a great deal more than that. We know positive influence of ENSO will continue for some months after it is back to neutral so unlikely to have a negative effect until last couple of months of this year. If ENSO represented all the discrepancy that would make it fairly easy to estimate values falling back to around .75C by end of year so 2016 clearly warmer than 2015. However how can we speculate about the rest of the discrepancy with an unknown cause?

We could look at residuals on above graph. Sometimes there is 3 consecutive years that are above or below trend. While we could have something like that or a much shorter time before a return towards the trend, that isn't very convincing as 3 year periods could have period of months that are on opposite side of trend line. You could have typical return to trend times of just several months and still generate three consecutive years on same side as trend line. Perhaps a graph of monthly adjusted figures would be more useful for this purpose.

( monthly on this graph

is unadjusted monthly data not the monthly adjusted data.)

With cause of large majority of deviation of current temps from trend being unknown, this makes it hard to speculate too much whether this is likely to return to trend rapidly or not and whether there is much any risk of 2016 being cooler than 2015.

Without knowing cause of majority of deviation from trend or any detail of how likely a rapid return to trend and then go in opposite direction is, I  think it is hard to completely rule it out.

I would suspect it is very unlikely there could be such a rapid reversal soon enough and therefore there is very little risk of 2016 being cooler than 2015. Perhaps surprising that predictions are being made without referring to this issue?

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #925 on: April 24, 2016, 06:29:56 PM »
With cause of large majority of deviation of current temps from trend being unknown, this makes it hard to speculate too much whether this is likely to return to trend rapidly or not and whether there is much any risk of 2016 being cooler than 2015.

Without knowing cause of majority of deviation from trend or any detail of how likely a rapid return to trend and then go in opposite direction is, I  think it is hard to completely rule it out.

I would suspect it is very unlikely there could be such a rapid reversal soon enough and therefore there is very little risk of 2016 being cooler than 2015. Perhaps surprising that predictions are being made without referring to this issue?

Given the large number is different parameters in Earth Systems Models, all with different confidence ranges, it is not surprising that a modeler like Gavin Schmidt might say "Wow!" when he saw the observed 2016 GMST; as there is a wide range of projected GMST values in the CMIP5 models.  However, as discussed in the three linked references (see images) Earth Energy Imbalance, EEI (or Global Energy Imbalance or Planetary Energy Imbalance), is a more fundamental measure of climate change than is GMST and it is much less subject to noise due to such factors as: the ENSO cycle, multi-decadal cycles like the PDO/IPO (which are both now positive), and cold spots in the North Atlantic, and Southern, Oceans due to rapid glacial meltwater pool at the surface while deeper, more saline, seawater remains relatively warm.

K. von Schuckmann, M. D. Palmer, K. E. Trenberth, A. Cazenave, D. Chambers, N. Champollion, J. Hansen, S. A. Josey, N. Loeb, P.-P. Mathieu, B. Meyssignac & M. Wild (2016), "An imperative to monitor Earth's energy imbalance", Nature Climate Change Volume: 6, Pages:  138–144, doi:10.1038/nclimate2876

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v6/n2/full/nclimate2876.html
&
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/292188056_An_imperative_to_monitor_Earth%27s_energy_imbalance

Matthew D. Palmer, Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, United Kingdom (2016), "Earth’s energy imbalance and the global warming ‘hiatus’: insights from climate models and ocean reanalyses"

https://agu.confex.com/agu/os16/preliminaryview.cgi/Paper88665.html
Matt Palmer and Doug McNeall (UK Met Office) (2016), "Earth's energy imbalance"

http://www.climate-lab-book.ac.uk/2016/earths-energy-imbalance/

Extract: " All the energy that enters or leaves the Earth system does so via radiation at the top of the atmosphere. For a stable climate, the sunlight absorbed by the planet must be balanced by thermal infra-red radiation emitted to space. Increased atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations give rise to an imbalance in Earth’s energy budget by initially reducing the amount of emitted thermal infra-red radiation. The result of this imbalance is an accumulation of excess energy in the Earth system over time. The size of the imbalance, or equivalently, the rate of energy accumulation in the Earth system, is the most fundamental metric determining the rate of climate change.
The vast majority (>90%) of the excess energy is absorbed by the ocean, with much smaller amounts going into heating of the land, atmosphere and ice cover (Figure 1). Therefore, if we want to track the increase in Earth system energy content over time it is essential to have comprehensive measurements of temperature, and the associated heat content, throughout our vast oceans.
As a result of the energy imbalance, the Earth system adjusts in a number of ways that have a direct impact on both the marine and terrestrial environment. The various elements of global warming that we are familiar with – including global surface temperature rise, reductions in snow and ice cover, and sea level rise – can be thought of as symptoms of EEI (Figure 2). In our thinking and communication around climate change, it is important not to confuse any of these symptoms with the underlying cause.
A large part of the controversy around the recent slowdown in surface temperature rise, or ‘hiatus’, stems from the fact that many commentators view global surface temperature rise as the primary indicator of global climate change. If surface warming has paused, climate change has paused, right? Wrong. Both observational studies and computer simulations show that there is only a weak relationship between Earth’s energy imbalance and surface temperature change over a decade or so (Figure 3a). This is because natural climate fluctuations can re-arrange ocean heat content, to either offset or add to the long-term rate of global surface temperature rise over a decade or so.
Since the ocean becomes the dominant term in Earth’s energy budget on timescales longer than about 1 year changes in ocean heat content provide a much more reliable indicator of EEI (and therefore climate change) than surface temperature on decadal timescales (Figure 3). Indeed, time series of upper ocean heat content and satellite measurements agree on a fairly steady rate of heat uptake over the past 20 years or so, suggesting that EEI has also been relatively constant during this time (Figure 4). When viewed in terms of EEI, there is little or no evidence for a recent ‘hiatus’ in the rate of global climate change."

Thus is it plausible that: (a) during the recent faux hiatus heat content accumulated in all the oceans of the world, and that this accumulated heat is now contributing to a multi-decadal long upswing in GMST values; (b) during the rapid economic development of China the associated increase of aerosols were more effective at masking global warming than previously expected and that now with the worldwide focus on closing coal-fired power plants that several decades worth of global warming are now being rapidly unmasked; and (c) since 2008, atmospheric methane concentrations are up by over 5% (compared to 2000 to 2007) and with a GWP10 of 130, this could be contributing to the current spike in GMST.  Also, considering the risk of a record low ASIE in 2016 and the associated increase in Arctic Amplification; it might be more advisable to err on the side of precaution and look at the upper bound of Gavin Schmidt's confidence range for projected 2016 GMST anom, and consider possible values closer to 1.5C than to 1.1C.
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #926 on: April 24, 2016, 11:01:21 PM »
To add some more plots to support the points made in my last post:

- I provide the first NOAA image showing the distribution of temperature departures around the globe in March 2016; which, makes it clear that all of the oceans of the world are contributing to the unusually high GMST anom possibly because more heat was stored in them during the faux hiatus.
- The second image shows AR5-SOD's determination of CO2-e for the 2000 anthropogenic emissions by component and for different periods.  This plot shows that over a 10-year period both CH4 & SO2 have large CO2-e values, so even a 5% change in this values (each) over the past several years could contribute to the recent high GMST values.
- The third attached image is from Sleepy and shows that the current El Nino is degrading relatively slowly compared to the 97-98 Super El Nino, so if a La Nina does not occur this year that might contribute another approximately 0.1C the 2016 GMST anom value.
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #927 on: April 25, 2016, 05:30:39 AM »
Without knowing cause of majority of deviation from trend or any detail of how likely a rapid return to trend and then go in opposite direction is, I  think it is hard to completely rule it out.

I would like to note that the first attached SkS plot issued March 2016 indicates a trend with a rate of 0.167C/decade; while the second image by Gavin Schmidt gives the projected 2016 GMST anom not as a function of time along the trend line but rather the anomaly to date in a given year, which should be a function of forcing and climate sensitivity.  Furthermore, I note that forcing can come from such sources as water evaporation from the ocean due to high ocean heat content or the removal of aerosol masking; and that climate sensitivity does not have to be a function of GMST but could be due to heat in the ocean melting glacier ice that then contributes to ice-climate feedback. Finally, I note that before 2008 BAU radiative forcing did not include the 5% extract methane forcing, but now it does, so one would not expect to return to a 0.167C/decade trend line, but one where the slope of the trend line is a function of the forcing including more methane forcing, more forcing from energy stored in the oceans over several past decades, and from unmasking of negative aerosol forcing (as is the case when using Gavin's plot).
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #928 on: April 25, 2016, 05:25:06 PM »
The following is a partial re-post of Reply #65 in the "Greenland 2016 Melt Season" thread by Andreas Muenchow:

<Philosophical Derail>There are fundamental truths in physics that are expressed as partial differential equations that may look complicated, but in their essence are really simple. Conservation of mass, energy, and angular momentum are such simple laws that are expressed as complex equations that are the basis of climate modeling.

Most people in climate debates (including many scientists) prefer to think in linear regressions between as few variables as possible. Financial models, too, have a strong foundation in past data that often is an expression of human behavior. While this has been useful, there is no guarantee that yesterday's regression is any good tommorrow.

To me as a physicist, these are not models, but statistical attempts to discern patterns where no model exists. This is why in Finance you can model only what has happened before, but in physics you can model accurately what has never happened before. The difference is that our physical laws such as conservation of mass and energy are independent of data, they always hold. This allows us to make predictions beyond the event horizon of what has happened already and for what we have no data.</Philosophical Derail>
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Tor Bejnar

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4606
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 879
  • Likes Given: 826
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #929 on: April 25, 2016, 05:54:27 PM »
For those who don't visit the ASI Graphs pages often enough, here's the DMI north of 80N temps graph.


As warm as it is up North, boy is it still cold!
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things because "we cannot negotiate with the melting point of ice"

DoomInTheUK

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 221
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #930 on: April 25, 2016, 06:31:07 PM »
Or to put it another way - "Toasty is relative".

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #931 on: April 25, 2016, 10:29:11 PM »
The linked article (& associated attached plot) confirms that due to a large-scale climate correction associated with the 1998-2013 faux hiatus (for GMST but not for EEI), GMST anom is projected to continue increasing through at least 2020 (but given the PDO/IPO cycle, probably through at least 2030):

http://www.bitsofscience.org/real-global-temperature-trend-2016-2020-global-forecast-average-temperatures-la-nina-7079/

Extract: "Well, the people at the UK Met Office’s Hadley Centre have got news – bad news.
They used the CIMP5 climate model (the upgraded IPCC model – a standard) to predict the net global temperature effects for the next five year period (2016-2020) following from continued rise in atmospheric CO2 and modelled fluctuations in ocean currents, like the El Niño/La Niña Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC).
Their model runs confirm the ‘scientific gut-feeling’ of many: The temperature record of 2015 isn’t a real ‘peak’, but rather a large-scale correction of the ’1998-2013 temperature plateau’ – one that opened up room for the underlying temperature trend to emerge."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

crandles

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3379
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 81
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #932 on: April 25, 2016, 10:44:26 PM »
Quote
Well, the people at the UK Met Office’s Hadley Centre have got news – bad news.

Quote
They used the CIMP5 climate model (the upgraded IPCC model – a standard)

Looks like a rehash of Jan 2016 forecast:
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/seasonal-to-decadal/long-range/decadal-fc

(CIMP5 Huh? is that CMIP5 which is model comparison project not "the upgraded IPCC model")

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #933 on: April 25, 2016, 10:57:06 PM »
Quote
Well, the people at the UK Met Office’s Hadley Centre have got news – bad news.

Quote
They used the CIMP5 climate model (the upgraded IPCC model – a standard)

Looks like a rehash of Jan 2016 forecast:
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/seasonal-to-decadal/long-range/decadal-fc

(CIMP5 Huh? is that CMIP5 which is model comparison project not "the upgraded IPCC model")

You are correct that I posted this information in Reply #765 (see attached identical image); what can be said about reporters referencing CMIP5 (which is not the source of the image).

The extract from Reply #765 says: "This five-year forecast isn’t like the ones that appear on the evening news, rather, it is a research effort aimed at improving climate models. The goal is to get models to the point where they can have skill in predicting features like drought or seasonal hurricane activity a few years ahead, said climate scientist Doug Smith, who leads the Met Office effort. Such predictions would allow governments and societies time to prepare, he said."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #934 on: April 29, 2016, 07:29:10 PM »
SkS has finally written an article to go with the image that I posted in Reply #915 (& re-posted in Reply #931) of the SkS 2C track thru March 2016.  The article indicates that the April GISS will be around 1.2C.

https://www.skepticalscience.com/2c-2016-03.html

Extract: "The first three months of 2016 have now all been blow-out months, all rising above 1°C anomaly over the GISS mid-century baseline. This month came in at 1.28°C. In fact, all of the past 6 months have come in at an unprecedented >1°C over their baseline. In terms of our anomaly over our 1880-1909 preindustrial baseline, this clocks in at 1.528°C and we've now marked 13 months where the 12 month average has remained over 1°C. We first crossed that point in February of 2015.
Reliable sources are telling me April 2016 is coming in about the same, around 1.2°C in the GISS data. The 2015/16 super El Nino is continuing to wane but we probably have a few more months of these extreme global anomalies to come before the surface station data begins to fall back to the long term mean trend line.

This is some crazy stuff, and we likely will have several more months of the same or similar coming.
Expect 2016 to be the third year in a row that we beat the record for global mean temperature."

See also:
http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2016/04/hottest-march-on-record-tracking-el.html

“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

James Lovejoy

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 160
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #935 on: April 30, 2016, 07:42:13 AM »
On April 24th I gave a central value for April's anomaly of 0.14C less than March's.  Data since then would move it to 0.15C less.  That would give an April anomaly of 1.13C.

That said, the poster at Skeptical Science almost certainly has access to better data then I do, so his estimate of 1.20C is probably better than my estimate.

If this were just a one of, caused by a monster el nino, it would be one thing, but the temperatures from the 1998 monster el nino were matched in around five years by those from a moderate el nino, and several years later by neutral conditions.  There's a better than even chance that the aftermath of this el nino will be worse, since so far the PDO seems stuck in positive territory.

Lord M Vader

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1406
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 60
  • Likes Given: 39
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #936 on: April 30, 2016, 10:54:17 AM »
This month have been quite fascinating and odd!!  No big spikes and neither any big drops. According to Nick Stokes graph this should be the most even month that have been seen during the last 16 months (as far as one can see at the graph)!


Lord M Vader

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1406
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 60
  • Likes Given: 39
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #937 on: May 02, 2016, 05:23:27 PM »
"Cool" start to expect for May after a significant drop by April 30. Nick Stokes numbers for April 30 was down to +0,395oC above the 1994-2013 normal. This is the lowest anomaly we have seen so far this year.

The anomaly for April according to Stokes numbers are 1,16o-1,18o above normal. Translating this into GISS and NOAA number I think it would be fair to guess that GISS numbers will be about +1,09-1,14o above the 1951-1980 normal. For NOAA it should be 1,01-1,09o above normal.

//LMV

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #938 on: May 02, 2016, 06:36:32 PM »
If SkS is correct & the April 2016 GISS anom is +1.20C,  then the 12-month running average LOTI value will increase from 1.21C at the end of March up to 1.26C by the end of April.
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

theoldinsane

  • New ice
  • Posts: 66
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #939 on: May 02, 2016, 07:12:29 PM »
If SkS is correct & the April 2016 GISS anom is +1.20C,  then the 12-month running average LOTI value will increase from 1.21C at the end of March up to 1.26C by the end of April.

If this trend continues, when can we be sure that a statistical significant trend change-point has occurred? (Or is this maybe a question for Tamino to evaluate?)

crandles

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3379
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 81
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #940 on: May 02, 2016, 07:32:12 PM »
If SkS is correct & the April 2016 GISS anom is +1.20C,  then the 12-month running average LOTI value will increase from 1.21C at the end of March up to 1.26C by the end of April.

GISS Loti per http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
2015    81   87   90   73   78   78   73   78   82  106  102  110     86  84     82   80   76   96  2015
2016   113  134  128 **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** ****   **** ***    119 **** **** ****  2016
Year   Jan  Feb  Mar  Apr  May  Jun  Jul  Aug  Sep  Oct  Nov  Dec    J-D D-N    DJF  MAM  JJA  SON  Year

I make that 12 month average to March as 96.25 not 1.21C

Think I have seen you refer to a different height loti record, so perhaps that is reason for the difference?

BornFromTheVoid

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1339
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 679
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #941 on: May 02, 2016, 07:36:55 PM »
If SkS is correct & the April 2016 GISS anom is +1.20C,  then the 12-month running average LOTI value will increase from 1.21C at the end of March up to 1.26C by the end of April.

GISS Loti per http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
2015    81   87   90   73   78   78   73   78   82  106  102  110     86  84     82   80   76   96  2015
2016   113  134  128 **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** ****   **** ***    119 **** **** ****  2016
Year   Jan  Feb  Mar  Apr  May  Jun  Jul  Aug  Sep  Oct  Nov  Dec    J-D D-N    DJF  MAM  JJA  SON  Year

I make that 12 month average to March as 96.25 not 1.21C

Think I have seen you refer to a different height loti record, so perhaps that is reason for the difference?

Pre-industrial baseline maybe?
I recently joined the twitter thing, where I post more analysis, pics and animations: @Icy_Samuel

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #942 on: May 02, 2016, 07:41:30 PM »
If SkS is correct & the April 2016 GISS anom is +1.20C,  then the 12-month running average LOTI value will increase from 1.21C at the end of March up to 1.26C by the end of April.

GISS Loti per http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
2015    81   87   90   73   78   78   73   78   82  106  102  110     86  84     82   80   76   96  2015
2016   113  134  128 **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** ****   **** ***    119 **** **** ****  2016
Year   Jan  Feb  Mar  Apr  May  Jun  Jul  Aug  Sep  Oct  Nov  Dec    J-D D-N    DJF  MAM  JJA  SON  Year

I make that 12 month average to March as 96.25 not 1.21C

Think I have seen you refer to a different height loti record, so perhaps that is reason for the difference?

My baseline is to preindustrial which uses an adjustment of -0.256 (this is the difference between the GISS baseline [1951-1980] and the 1880-1909 preindustrial baseline), as indicated in the attached SkS 2C tracker.  Most readers only care about how close we are to the 2C limit which is baselined to the pre-industrial (certainly the 1.20C value cited by SkS for April is baselined to pre-industrial, and by 1.26C value is an estimate of what the SkS tracker through April 2016 will show when it is issued later this month).
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #943 on: May 03, 2016, 10:07:54 PM »
How much of the GMST departures is due to distortion from ice melt cooling portions of the surface of the Southern Ocean (see the attached cci global temp departure 5-day forecast from May 3 2016)?
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Michael Hauber

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1114
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 168
  • Likes Given: 16
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #944 on: May 04, 2016, 12:21:22 AM »
Current 12 month GISS average:  0.93.  We have not yet exceeded the The CMIP projection for 2016 at 0.96.   However I would be surprised if the 12 month average does not go up further in coming months.  To compare, the 12 month Giss average to March 98 was 0.54, which was somewhat ahead of the CMIP projection of 0.47 for 1998.

We are slightly cooler relative to model projections than we were in 1998.

Climate change:  Prepare for the worst, hope for the best, expect the middle.

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1334
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 226
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #945 on: May 04, 2016, 03:29:07 AM »
I have seen an amount of 0.3 degrees as the difference between the 1850-1900 range used by the IPCC and the 1951-80 baseline used by NASA. These differences cause a lot of confusion in the media, I wish NASA would also report against the "pre-industrial" IPCC target baseline. In a lot of media stories the difference is not noted, leading people to believe that we are farther away from the 2 degrees C target (let alone having passed the 1.5 degrees target for two months).

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1334
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 226
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #946 on: May 04, 2016, 03:34:08 AM »
Found the reference I was looking for with respect to the 0.3 degrees number, top of page 8:

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/3/034009/pdf

DavidR

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 740
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 36
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #947 on: May 04, 2016, 10:29:30 AM »
Current 12 month GISS average:  0.93.  We have not yet exceeded the The CMIP projection for 2016 at 0.96.   However I would be surprised if the 12 month average does not go up further in coming months.  To compare, the 12 month Giss average to March 98 was 0.54, which was somewhat ahead of the CMIP projection of 0.47 for 1998.

We are slightly cooler relative to model projections than we were in 1998.
My  figures put the GISS Apr - Mar average anomaly at 0.96. The effect  of the El Nino should persist until September when temperatures are likely to drop below the Sep 2015 figure.  Apr - Sep was the period when the 1998 El Nino was furthest above the previous record.We can therefore expect the 12 month average to continue to rise for a while.
Toto, I've a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #948 on: May 04, 2016, 05:24:08 PM »
Current 12 month GISS average:  0.93.  We have not yet exceeded the The CMIP projection for 2016 at 0.96.   However I would be surprised if the 12 month average does not go up further in coming months.  To compare, the 12 month Giss average to March 98 was 0.54, which was somewhat ahead of the CMIP projection of 0.47 for 1998.

We are slightly cooler relative to model projections than we were in 1998.

Do you have access to CMIP5 projected land-ocean values for the North Hemisphere as the following NASA data indicates that the NH is warming much faster than the GMST departures?

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/NH.Ts.txt

  N.HEMI Temperature Anomalies in 0.01 degrees Celsius      base period: 1951-1980

Year    Jan   Feb  Mar  Apr  May  Jun   Jul   Aug  Sep  Oct  Nov  Dec       
2015   136  134  152  121  119  120  102  112  120  137  158  189 
2016   192  245  236 **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** 

Divide by 100 to get changes in degrees Celsius (deg-C).
To get to pre-industrial values add 0.256C to all Celsius values
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Steven

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 957
    • View Profile
    • Arctic sea ice data and graphs
  • Liked: 481
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #949 on: May 04, 2016, 09:18:22 PM »
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/NH.Ts.txt

  N.HEMI Temperature Anomalies in 0.01 degrees Celsius      base period: 1951-1980

Year    Jan   Feb  Mar  Apr  May  Jun   Jul   Aug  Sep  Oct  Nov  Dec       
2015   136  134  152  121  119  120  102  112  120  137  158  189 
2016   192  245  236 **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** 

Divide by 100 to get changes in degrees Celsius (deg-C).

The above numbers are for the Northern Hemisphere land surface air temperature.  The Northern Hemisphere land+ocean data for GISS is here:

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/NH.Ts+dSST.txt


CMIP5 dataset can be downloaded from:

http://climexp.knmi.nl/selectfield_cmip5.cgi

Using RCP8.5, I calculate that the CMIP5 ensemble mean projection for 2016 was  0.95°C (relative to baseline 1951-1980) for global temperature, and 1.15°C for the Northern Hemisphere.   2016 will probably exceed those values, but of course it would be more meaningful to use an ENSO-neutral year (rather than a super El Nino year) to compare models vs. observations.