3 ms·
I simply don't understand this result - it takes ~4,000x as much energy to raise 1kg of water 1 degree compared to air. And how could this trend have started in
by GlibMonkeyDeath 3y ago
I simply don't understand this result - it takes ~4,000x as much energy to raise 1kg of water 1 degree compared to air. And how could this trend have started in 1850 (a clear trend from 1850-1900 is observed in the data in Figure 5b)? The sponges were collected at 30-100 m depth too, so this isn't just a surface effect.
- nvm0n2 3y agoYou are correct, it couldn't and in fact 1850 has traditionally been referred to in climatology as "pre industrial", but this site is really the wrong place to try and actually talk about science. The intellectual curiosity fans here don't like it at all.
- GlibMonkeyDeath 3y agoThank you - I was surprised by the down votes, although I could have added more detail to make my objection even more clear, e.g: Using the Stefan Boltzmann law, 1 extra degree corresponds to about an extra 3 W/m2 of greenhouse radiation (using an emissivity of 0.6 for the atmosphere.) To raise 1 m2, 1 cm thick water (10 kg) by 1 C would require (4 J/g/K)*(10,000 g) ~ 40,000 J, or about 4 hours. So 100 m would take 4 years, 3 km (the average depth of the ocean) ~100 years, assuming perfect mixing. So the ocean temperature would lag by decades, possibly centuries, even if the atmosphere ramped up by 1 degree from 1850-1900, which it didn't.
- selimthegrim 3y agohttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_layer#Oceanic_mixed_layer https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_layer#Oceanic_mixed_la...