6 ms·

New record anomaly for North Atlantic sea surface temperatures

97 points by itsreallyhot 3y ago

magicfractal 3y ago
We all know what is going and what must be done: Market-based solutions for the climate crisis have failed and are too slow to address the issue, all current oil reserves should be immediately valued at zero dollars. Many governments have been completely captured and are not working towards humanity’s long term survival. State of emergency should be declared with full mobilization (ie total war economy) towards addressing the climate crisis, that’s the only way out while there’s still time. To pay for it, the usual tools nation-states have employed at times of war: devaluing currency, high income taxes (90% bracket) and disappropriation of non-productive wealth, etc. Other similar crises have happened and solved in this way. It is possible to do with democratic feedback so no one stays behind and we come out of it with a more just society.
antiquark 3y ago
Related: "50 million tons of water vapor from Tonga's eruption could warm Earth for years. (2022)" https://www.space.com/tonga-eruption-water-vapor-warm-earth https://www.space.com/tonga-eruption-water-vapor-warm-earth
nabla9 3y ago
3.96 standard deviations above the mean.
revscat 3y ago
This site tends to default to a “remain placid” attitude and flag/downvote energetic replies, but if this isn’t worth abject panic and appropriate action then I’m not sure what is.
- gmuslera 3y ago
  Sometimes running in circles screaming is the only remaining realistic course of action.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- zosima 3y ago
  And what energetic appropriate response would you do for a phenomen that is as rare and poorly understood as this? Please notice that the link between this sudden 4sigma increase in surface temperatures and a small long-term continuous increase in atmospheric infrared absorbing gasses is at best extremely strained.
  - breakyerself 3y ago
    On what planet is a 50% increase small? The CO2 we've added to the atmosphere is trapping an almost unfathomable amount of energy in the climate system that wouldn't be there otherwise. Theres more CO2 in the atmosphere that here has been in millions of years. Global average temps are higher than they've been in more than 100,000 years. The oceans are 25% more acidic. This is an out of control science experiment with the thermal and chemical properties of our at atmosphere and oceans.
    - zosima 3y ago
      CO2 is not even close to being the main infrared-absorbing gas in the atmosphere. The point is that this anomaly is unlikely to be mainly due to the recent warming trend.
      - breakyerself 3y ago
        CO2 is the primary greenhouse gas in terms of climate. You're on that water vapor crackpipe, but water vapor has a residence time of only 72 hours. It doesn't drive warming and cooling. It only works as a feedback for other things like CO2 that do. You should really just let this outdated climate denial bullshit go. It's embarrassing.
        zosima 3y ago
        CO2 is not the main infrared absorbing gas in the atmosphere. That is the point. Residence time does not mean anything with regards to that. Increased concentrations of CO2 may still be responsible for some warming, but that does not change that fundamental fact.
- mistrial9 3y ago
  panic fatigue? it has been at least ten years, more for many here.. that "urgent" is an appropriate word. The "control and stall" groups just get more money and more time, not less it seems here in the USA.
  - avgcorrection 3y ago
    Non-anthropomorphic climate change can take centuries or millenia to happen. So that people are concerned about things changing on the scale of decades seems understandable.
- anonymouse008 3y ago
  Does any of this correlate with the solar cycle at all? Is that even a field people look to?
  - breakyerself 3y ago
    Solar irradiance has been declining for 35 years. Which is one way we know it isn't the sun. Also the troposphere is warming rapidly while the stratosphere is cooling. Which is only something you expect from greenhouse gas related warming. Also night time temps are increasing faster than daytime temps. Another fingerprint of greenhouse gas induced warming. Also the earth is hotter than it's been in 100,000 years and scientists predicted that greenhouse gasses would cause exactly this much warming with this level of greenhouse gasses 50 years ago well before it was obvious what was going to happen. So yeah. Not the sun. Good question though.
  - legosexmagic 3y ago
    yes. weather people are aware of the sun. but thanks for pointing it out lol
  - mikeyouse 3y ago
    Yes - it was a popular AGW denialst go-to in the early 2000s until the increasing temps continued completely independently from the 11-year solar cycle. It's been pretty thoroughly debunked now, e.g; https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-018-0293-3 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-018-0293-3
    - anonymouse008 3y ago
      Thanks for the paper. Interesting analysis. I guess my thinking is more along the lines of the right sun spots and solar events in the right places - i.e. with enough energy directed in the right plane to affect earth systems. Maybe it could be fruitful to explore radio blackouts caused by solar storms - to see if correlation with temperatures could exist. That could falsify or verify such a correlation and further analysis as well. Just a thought
- alxjrvs 3y ago
  Well, don't you think it's a little cruel to scare the children just because the house is burning down around them? /s
- contravariant 3y ago
  Abject panic and appropriate action sound mutually exclusive, so if remaining placid is the alternative to abject panic I'm voting for placidness.
- TheFreim 3y ago
  All of the "serious" people who are "panicking" while refusing to actually amend their life or act in a reasonable fashion is a large part of why people have disengaged.
  - breakyerself 3y ago
    I know. Clearly CO2 isn't a greenhouse gas and the planet isn't hotter than it's been in 100,000 years because Al Gore and Leonardo Decaprio are hypocrites. I know thats how I decide my priorities is by gauging the hypocrisy levels of celebrity activists.
    - TheFreim 3y ago
      Not sure what you are talking about.
- itsreallyhot 3y ago
  The issue with this site is its total belief in tech as a solution. You will have plenty of people here saying "there's no need to change your lifestyle, some tech billionaire will solve it". I also think the wealth of most people here means they think they will be insulated from the problems caused by climate change. Just my 2p.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
mydriasis 3y ago
What does it mean / what will happen as a result? The twitter thread says more precipitation -- anything more specific than that? Big storms? No storms?
- yogthos 3y ago
  It's going to translate to an increased rate of extreme weather events. Droughts in particular are of a concern as they're already resulting in massive crop losses. Here are a couple of recent examples in North America * https://www.ualrpublicradio.org/local-regional-news/2022-12-13/arkansas-farmers-lose-billions-as-weather-and-war-impact-yield-costs https://www.ualrpublicradio.org/local-regional-news/2022-12-... * https://globalnews.ca/news/9761043/dry-spring-southern-albertan-farmers-zero-production/ https://globalnews.ca/news/9761043/dry-spring-southern-alber... This kind of thing can easily lead to famines if a significant portion of the crops ends up being lost during the year.
  - mydriasis 3y ago
    Even in Ohio we're having trouble this year. It didn't rain for four weeks, and our garden shows it.
    - yogthos 3y ago
      People really don't appreciate how easily food production collapse can happen. All it takes is a few weeks of extreme weather.
      - itsreallyhot 3y ago
        Yep, and we have no reserves, it's almost entirely just-in-time. To quote George Monbiot: most of the worlds food reserves are at sea.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
hnburnsy 3y ago
From NOAA... This global 5km Sea Surface Temperature (SST) Anomaly product, displays the difference between today's SST and the long-term average. The scale goes from -5 to +5 °C. Positive numbers mean the temperature is warmer than average; negative means cooler than average. https://www.ospo.noaa.gov/Products/ocean/sst/anomaly/index.html https://www.ospo.noaa.gov/Products/ocean/sst/anomaly/index.h...
- lostmsu 3y ago
  It says "daily" but how to access other days?
  - mikeyouse 3y ago
    You can step through the days here: https://climatereanalyzer.org/reanalysis/daily_maps/?dm_id=natlan-ced&wm_id=sstanom&year=2023 https://climatereanalyzer.org/reanalysis/daily_maps/?dm_id=n... Or the raw json is linked in the top tweet; https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/json/oisst2.1_natlan1_sst_day.json https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/json/oisst2.1_n...
lwansbrough 3y ago
The truth is that until you, dear reader, are willing to give up your usage of your car and probably your AC, you are part of the problem. And nobody is ready to hear that. But it's the truth. All this talk about "well so and so is a bigger problem" is generally not only wrong, but it's just useless finger pointing. I no longer have a car, and I don't have AC. And I live my life accordingly. And sometimes it sucks. You should too.
- breakyerself 3y ago
  This isn't going to be solved by individuals voluntarily putting the climate above their own comfort. It's going to take strong bold policy. It's good to make good decisions and it's not great that some people don't care, but if your strategy to save society and the biosphere is based on individual choices the. We've already lost.
- itsreallyhot 3y ago
  Biggest way you can personally make an impact is by eating a plant based diet, but yes. Don't fly. Cycle. Look into smarter ways of heating/cooling your house. Support groups like XR and Just Stop Oil.
  - st-keller 3y ago
    Did all of that for more than 30 years now (ok, there weren’t any groups back then). Didn‘t help much I think. Ok for me - i did what i wanted to do - but perhaps government should start to do something too?
    - lwansbrough 3y ago
      For every guy like you there’s 10 guys driving an F150 who think that’s cool. So when you go to the polls, who do you think gets voted in? The guy who’s going to force people out of their trucks?
- sauwan 3y ago
  I used to feel this way (I bike commute and only turn on our AC maybe 3-4 times a year), but I've come to believe that this idea of personal responsibility is a major fossil fuel industry talking point. The fact is, governments around the world provide massive subsidy to all sorts of industry's that tends to support GHG production. We're never going to get this under control until we demand our representatives change the policy and incentive structures for a large majority of industry out there. It's not just cooling and cars/trucks. It's agriculture, heating, almost all of transportation/shipping, a majority of power consumption, etc. But the entrenched powers at be want you to think that this is a personal responsibility issue, because lots of people stand to lose lots of money once we realize that the only thing that can fix this issue is a massive restructuring of worldwide government policy and incentives.
lucas_membrane 3y ago
I saw an article about this last week. It identified the cause as a new rule last year switching the fuel for cargo ships and tankers that reduced the allowed sulfur content by about 80%. This is very good to slow ocean acidification, save algae and coral. But the sulfur in the air reflects or scatters sunlight away from the earth and the surface of the sea. Go figure.
- bostonwalker 3y ago
  Source please?
  - lucas_membrane 3y ago
    https://climatecasino.net/2023/06/wtf-is-happening-an-overview/ https://climatecasino.net/2023/06/wtf-is-happening-an-overvi... It is a quite long article. Almost at the bottom it gets around to this: Which says: "Here’s where things get esoteric. As of January 1, 2020, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) put a limit on the sulfur content in shipping fuels, reducing the global upper limit on sulfur content from 3.50% to 0.50%. This policy is referred to as IMO 2020. Here is a link to an article describing this change. This reduced limit was mandatory and led to over a 75% drop in the emission of sulfur oxides. While great for the environment in many respects (e.g. less acid rain and ocean acidification), there was also a not-so-unexpected consequence." A little more explanation and discussion of some other possibly contributing factors follow what I quote above. BTW, bostonwalker, you owe me, but I'll try to return the favoe at my earliest convenience. It took me at least a half hour of digging through my history to find TFA. If I had a link, I would have included it. And, BTW, it would have been OK to list me as a source on your doctoral dissertation. Although I am getting old and have a hard time remembering, I am widely known to be very reliable, particularly when I'm right.

97 points by itsreallyhot 3y ago

We all know what is going and what must be done: Market-based solutions for the climate crisis have failed and are too slow to address the issue, all current oil reserves should be immediately valued at zero dollars. Many governments have been completely captured and are not working towards humanity’s long term survival. State of emergency should be declared with full mobilization (ie total war economy) towards addressing the climate crisis, that’s the only way out while there’s still time. To pay for it, the usual tools nation-states have employed at times of war: devaluing currency, high income taxes (90% bracket) and disappropriation of non-productive wealth, etc. Other similar crises have happened and solved in this way. It is possible to do with democratic feedback so no one stays behind and we come out of it with a more just society.

antiquark 3y ago

Related: "50 million tons of water vapor from Tonga's eruption could warm Earth for years. (2022)" https://www.space.com/tonga-eruption-water-vapor-warm-earth https://www.space.com/tonga-eruption-water-vapor-warm-earth

nabla9 3y ago

3.96 standard deviations above the mean.

revscat 3y ago

This site tends to default to a “remain placid” attitude and flag/downvote energetic replies, but if this isn’t worth abject panic and appropriate action then I’m not sure what is.

gmuslera 3y ago
Sometimes running in circles screaming is the only remaining realistic course of action.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
zosima 3y ago
And what energetic appropriate response would you do for a phenomen that is as rare and poorly understood as this? Please notice that the link between this sudden 4sigma increase in surface temperatures and a small long-term continuous increase in atmospheric infrared absorbing gasses is at best extremely strained.
- breakyerself 3y ago
  On what planet is a 50% increase small? The CO2 we've added to the atmosphere is trapping an almost unfathomable amount of energy in the climate system that wouldn't be there otherwise. Theres more CO2 in the atmosphere that here has been in millions of years. Global average temps are higher than they've been in more than 100,000 years. The oceans are 25% more acidic. This is an out of control science experiment with the thermal and chemical properties of our at atmosphere and oceans.
  - zosima 3y ago
    CO2 is not even close to being the main infrared-absorbing gas in the atmosphere. The point is that this anomaly is unlikely to be mainly due to the recent warming trend.
    - breakyerself 3y ago
      CO2 is the primary greenhouse gas in terms of climate. You're on that water vapor crackpipe, but water vapor has a residence time of only 72 hours. It doesn't drive warming and cooling. It only works as a feedback for other things like CO2 that do. You should really just let this outdated climate denial bullshit go. It's embarrassing.
      - zosima 3y ago
        CO2 is not the main infrared absorbing gas in the atmosphere. That is the point. Residence time does not mean anything with regards to that. Increased concentrations of CO2 may still be responsible for some warming, but that does not change that fundamental fact.
mistrial9 3y ago
panic fatigue? it has been at least ten years, more for many here.. that "urgent" is an appropriate word. The "control and stall" groups just get more money and more time, not less it seems here in the USA.
- avgcorrection 3y ago
  Non-anthropomorphic climate change can take centuries or millenia to happen. So that people are concerned about things changing on the scale of decades seems understandable.
anonymouse008 3y ago
Does any of this correlate with the solar cycle at all? Is that even a field people look to?
- breakyerself 3y ago
  Solar irradiance has been declining for 35 years. Which is one way we know it isn't the sun. Also the troposphere is warming rapidly while the stratosphere is cooling. Which is only something you expect from greenhouse gas related warming. Also night time temps are increasing faster than daytime temps. Another fingerprint of greenhouse gas induced warming. Also the earth is hotter than it's been in 100,000 years and scientists predicted that greenhouse gasses would cause exactly this much warming with this level of greenhouse gasses 50 years ago well before it was obvious what was going to happen. So yeah. Not the sun. Good question though.
- legosexmagic 3y ago
  yes. weather people are aware of the sun. but thanks for pointing it out lol
- mikeyouse 3y ago
  Yes - it was a popular AGW denialst go-to in the early 2000s until the increasing temps continued completely independently from the 11-year solar cycle. It's been pretty thoroughly debunked now, e.g; https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-018-0293-3 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-018-0293-3
  - anonymouse008 3y ago
    Thanks for the paper. Interesting analysis. I guess my thinking is more along the lines of the right sun spots and solar events in the right places - i.e. with enough energy directed in the right plane to affect earth systems. Maybe it could be fruitful to explore radio blackouts caused by solar storms - to see if correlation with temperatures could exist. That could falsify or verify such a correlation and further analysis as well. Just a thought
alxjrvs 3y ago
Well, don't you think it's a little cruel to scare the children just because the house is burning down around them? /s
contravariant 3y ago
Abject panic and appropriate action sound mutually exclusive, so if remaining placid is the alternative to abject panic I'm voting for placidness.
TheFreim 3y ago
All of the "serious" people who are "panicking" while refusing to actually amend their life or act in a reasonable fashion is a large part of why people have disengaged.
- breakyerself 3y ago
  I know. Clearly CO2 isn't a greenhouse gas and the planet isn't hotter than it's been in 100,000 years because Al Gore and Leonardo Decaprio are hypocrites. I know thats how I decide my priorities is by gauging the hypocrisy levels of celebrity activists.
  - TheFreim 3y ago
    Not sure what you are talking about.
itsreallyhot 3y ago
The issue with this site is its total belief in tech as a solution. You will have plenty of people here saying "there's no need to change your lifestyle, some tech billionaire will solve it". I also think the wealth of most people here means they think they will be insulated from the problems caused by climate change. Just my 2p.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

mydriasis 3y ago

What does it mean / what will happen as a result? The twitter thread says more precipitation -- anything more specific than that? Big storms? No storms?

yogthos 3y ago
It's going to translate to an increased rate of extreme weather events. Droughts in particular are of a concern as they're already resulting in massive crop losses. Here are a couple of recent examples in North America * https://www.ualrpublicradio.org/local-regional-news/2022-12-13/arkansas-farmers-lose-billions-as-weather-and-war-impact-yield-costs https://www.ualrpublicradio.org/local-regional-news/2022-12-... * https://globalnews.ca/news/9761043/dry-spring-southern-albertan-farmers-zero-production/ https://globalnews.ca/news/9761043/dry-spring-southern-alber... This kind of thing can easily lead to famines if a significant portion of the crops ends up being lost during the year.
- mydriasis 3y ago
  Even in Ohio we're having trouble this year. It didn't rain for four weeks, and our garden shows it.
  - yogthos 3y ago
    People really don't appreciate how easily food production collapse can happen. All it takes is a few weeks of extreme weather.
    - itsreallyhot 3y ago
      Yep, and we have no reserves, it's almost entirely just-in-time. To quote George Monbiot: most of the worlds food reserves are at sea.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

hnburnsy 3y ago

From NOAA... This global 5km Sea Surface Temperature (SST) Anomaly product, displays the difference between today's SST and the long-term average. The scale goes from -5 to +5 °C. Positive numbers mean the temperature is warmer than average; negative means cooler than average. https://www.ospo.noaa.gov/Products/ocean/sst/anomaly/index.html https://www.ospo.noaa.gov/Products/ocean/sst/anomaly/index.h...

lostmsu 3y ago
It says "daily" but how to access other days?
- mikeyouse 3y ago
  You can step through the days here: https://climatereanalyzer.org/reanalysis/daily_maps/?dm_id=natlan-ced&wm_id=sstanom&year=2023 https://climatereanalyzer.org/reanalysis/daily_maps/?dm_id=n... Or the raw json is linked in the top tweet; https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/json/oisst2.1_natlan1_sst_day.json https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/json/oisst2.1_n...

lwansbrough 3y ago

The truth is that until you, dear reader, are willing to give up your usage of your car and probably your AC, you are part of the problem. And nobody is ready to hear that. But it's the truth. All this talk about "well so and so is a bigger problem" is generally not only wrong, but it's just useless finger pointing. I no longer have a car, and I don't have AC. And I live my life accordingly. And sometimes it sucks. You should too.

breakyerself 3y ago
This isn't going to be solved by individuals voluntarily putting the climate above their own comfort. It's going to take strong bold policy. It's good to make good decisions and it's not great that some people don't care, but if your strategy to save society and the biosphere is based on individual choices the. We've already lost.
itsreallyhot 3y ago
Biggest way you can personally make an impact is by eating a plant based diet, but yes. Don't fly. Cycle. Look into smarter ways of heating/cooling your house. Support groups like XR and Just Stop Oil.
- st-keller 3y ago
  Did all of that for more than 30 years now (ok, there weren’t any groups back then). Didn‘t help much I think. Ok for me - i did what i wanted to do - but perhaps government should start to do something too?
  - lwansbrough 3y ago
    For every guy like you there’s 10 guys driving an F150 who think that’s cool. So when you go to the polls, who do you think gets voted in? The guy who’s going to force people out of their trucks?
sauwan 3y ago
I used to feel this way (I bike commute and only turn on our AC maybe 3-4 times a year), but I've come to believe that this idea of personal responsibility is a major fossil fuel industry talking point. The fact is, governments around the world provide massive subsidy to all sorts of industry's that tends to support GHG production. We're never going to get this under control until we demand our representatives change the policy and incentive structures for a large majority of industry out there. It's not just cooling and cars/trucks. It's agriculture, heating, almost all of transportation/shipping, a majority of power consumption, etc. But the entrenched powers at be want you to think that this is a personal responsibility issue, because lots of people stand to lose lots of money once we realize that the only thing that can fix this issue is a massive restructuring of worldwide government policy and incentives.

lucas_membrane 3y ago

I saw an article about this last week. It identified the cause as a new rule last year switching the fuel for cargo ships and tankers that reduced the allowed sulfur content by about 80%. This is very good to slow ocean acidification, save algae and coral. But the sulfur in the air reflects or scatters sunlight away from the earth and the surface of the sea. Go figure.

bostonwalker 3y ago
Source please?
- lucas_membrane 3y ago
  https://climatecasino.net/2023/06/wtf-is-happening-an-overview/ https://climatecasino.net/2023/06/wtf-is-happening-an-overvi... It is a quite long article. Almost at the bottom it gets around to this: Which says: "Here’s where things get esoteric. As of January 1, 2020, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) put a limit on the sulfur content in shipping fuels, reducing the global upper limit on sulfur content from 3.50% to 0.50%. This policy is referred to as IMO 2020. Here is a link to an article describing this change. This reduced limit was mandatory and led to over a 75% drop in the emission of sulfur oxides. While great for the environment in many respects (e.g. less acid rain and ocean acidification), there was also a not-so-unexpected consequence." A little more explanation and discussion of some other possibly contributing factors follow what I quote above. BTW, bostonwalker, you owe me, but I'll try to return the favoe at my earliest convenience. It took me at least a half hour of digging through my history to find TFA. If I had a link, I would have included it. And, BTW, it would have been OK to list me as a source on your doctoral dissertation. Although I am getting old and have a hard time remembering, I am widely known to be very reliable, particularly when I'm right.