5 ms·

Ocean Heat Has Shattered Records for More Than a Year. What's Happening?

23 points by jseliger 3y ago

freddealmeida 3y ago
The way we measure ocean temperatures changed. The oceans are actually within normal bounds if you use previous measurement methods. The new approach however shows more volatility that is not reflective of what is actually going on.
- skhunted 3y ago
  Do you have a reference to this? I’m interested knowing more about this. Is this something oceanographers generally agree on?
- defrost 3y ago
  Can you provide any specific details such as which countries|agencies changed, which data sets were affected, before|after graphics, etc? Do you have any concrete particular issue with, say, the European sea surface temperature ERA5 1979-2024 dataset ? https://pulse.climate.copernicus.eu/ https://pulse.climate.copernicus.eu/
  - garciasn 3y ago
    They’re not wrong; they just seem to imply this means the data are no longer worthwhile and all of the measured rise should only be attributed to the measurement change. This is a false read of the situation. https://science.nasa.gov/earth/climate-change/the-raw-truth-on-global-temperature-records/ https://science.nasa.gov/earth/climate-change/the-raw-truth-... There has been thoughtful and careful attention made to normalize the temperatures across any number of data collection and aggregation methods and they’re all showing the same upward trend.
rapjr9 3y ago
Does anyone have a feeling for just how much extra energy this represents? Is this like the equivalent of an average month of sunlight warming the ocean? A 0.5C degree increase across the entire surface of the ocean seems like a huge amount of energy, and it happened fairly quickly.
- defrost 3y ago
  Strictly speaking you might want to ask how much extra insulation in the atmosphere this represents. > Is this like the equivalent of an average month of sunlight warming the ocean? An average month of sunlight puts a truly vast amount of heat into the global sea and land surface, the overwhelming bulk of which is radiated away into the atmosphere which traps a small percentage of that heat thanks to "greenhouse gases" which have kept us warm for millennia. As the gas makeup of the atmosphere has changed in the past century, so to has the amount of trapped heat energy .. which goes into tempreture increases, but also wind energy for storms, freezer cell energy for cold snaps, melting ice from 0 degree ice to 0 degree water, etc.
- westcort 3y ago
  Seven Hiroshima bombs per second of heat added to the ocean 24/7/365: https://thehill.com/changing-america/sustainability/climate-change/589187-oceans-absorbed-heat-equivalent-to-7-hiroshima/ https://thehill.com/changing-america/sustainability/climate-...
yvely 3y ago
It surprises me Tonga eruption rarely or ever mentioned in relation to the last years record heat. It was predicted when it happened that it might lead to some temporary years of more heat. I don't have the knowledge to say if this is the primary reason, but it seems disingenuous of experts and news media to represent this purely as a consequence of our emissions.
- southernplaces7 3y ago
  The Tonga eruption should have slightly cooled the earth instead of warming it. Volcanic eruptions usually do. Their emissions of sulfur dioxide, which converts to sulfuric acid, which itself then condenses rapidly in the stratosphere to form fine sulfate aerosols are much more impactful in lowering temperatures than is their emission of carbon dioxide in increasing temperatures. Some practical evidence in favor o this: Of the major volcanic eruptions in the last couple centuries, almost all notably cooled the Earth and none created notable warming. The, 1784 Laki fissure eruption, the 1883 Krakatoa and the 1815 Tambora eruptions being three especially obvious examples of that cooling in action.
  - yvely 3y ago
    Wasn't this fairly special due to the amount of vapour? I remember reading it increased atmospheric water content by like 10%. It's so unimaginable to me that it simply is not related to record years.
    - jfengel 3y ago
      Water vapor doesn't remain in the air for long. Unlike CO2 and sulfur dioxide, water vapor condenses to liquid water and falls out of the atmosphere. So a volcano's water vapor effects (warming) can last days, while the sulfur dioxide effects (cooling) will last months or years.
1vuio0pswjnm7 3y ago
https://web.archive.org/web/20240410153850if_/https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/10/climate/ocean-heat-records.html https://web.archive.org/web/20240410153850if_/https://www.ny...
RetroTechie 3y ago
The scary bit here is that it's surprising even the experts (climate scientists). If they don't have an accurate understanding of what's happening, how to predict what will happen further on?
- veunes 3y ago
  It's scary, agree, but there are often uncertainties and challenges in predicting future climate trends

23 points by jseliger 3y ago

The way we measure ocean temperatures changed. The oceans are actually within normal bounds if you use previous measurement methods. The new approach however shows more volatility that is not reflective of what is actually going on.

skhunted 3y ago
Do you have a reference to this? I’m interested knowing more about this. Is this something oceanographers generally agree on?
defrost 3y ago
Can you provide any specific details such as which countries|agencies changed, which data sets were affected, before|after graphics, etc? Do you have any concrete particular issue with, say, the European sea surface temperature ERA5 1979-2024 dataset ? https://pulse.climate.copernicus.eu/ https://pulse.climate.copernicus.eu/
- garciasn 3y ago
  They’re not wrong; they just seem to imply this means the data are no longer worthwhile and all of the measured rise should only be attributed to the measurement change. This is a false read of the situation. https://science.nasa.gov/earth/climate-change/the-raw-truth-on-global-temperature-records/ https://science.nasa.gov/earth/climate-change/the-raw-truth-... There has been thoughtful and careful attention made to normalize the temperatures across any number of data collection and aggregation methods and they’re all showing the same upward trend.

rapjr9 3y ago

Does anyone have a feeling for just how much extra energy this represents? Is this like the equivalent of an average month of sunlight warming the ocean? A 0.5C degree increase across the entire surface of the ocean seems like a huge amount of energy, and it happened fairly quickly.

defrost 3y ago
Strictly speaking you might want to ask how much extra insulation in the atmosphere this represents. > Is this like the equivalent of an average month of sunlight warming the ocean? An average month of sunlight puts a truly vast amount of heat into the global sea and land surface, the overwhelming bulk of which is radiated away into the atmosphere which traps a small percentage of that heat thanks to "greenhouse gases" which have kept us warm for millennia. As the gas makeup of the atmosphere has changed in the past century, so to has the amount of trapped heat energy .. which goes into tempreture increases, but also wind energy for storms, freezer cell energy for cold snaps, melting ice from 0 degree ice to 0 degree water, etc.
westcort 3y ago
Seven Hiroshima bombs per second of heat added to the ocean 24/7/365: https://thehill.com/changing-america/sustainability/climate-change/589187-oceans-absorbed-heat-equivalent-to-7-hiroshima/ https://thehill.com/changing-america/sustainability/climate-...

yvely 3y ago

It surprises me Tonga eruption rarely or ever mentioned in relation to the last years record heat. It was predicted when it happened that it might lead to some temporary years of more heat. I don't have the knowledge to say if this is the primary reason, but it seems disingenuous of experts and news media to represent this purely as a consequence of our emissions.

southernplaces7 3y ago
The Tonga eruption should have slightly cooled the earth instead of warming it. Volcanic eruptions usually do. Their emissions of sulfur dioxide, which converts to sulfuric acid, which itself then condenses rapidly in the stratosphere to form fine sulfate aerosols are much more impactful in lowering temperatures than is their emission of carbon dioxide in increasing temperatures. Some practical evidence in favor o this: Of the major volcanic eruptions in the last couple centuries, almost all notably cooled the Earth and none created notable warming. The, 1784 Laki fissure eruption, the 1883 Krakatoa and the 1815 Tambora eruptions being three especially obvious examples of that cooling in action.
- yvely 3y ago
  Wasn't this fairly special due to the amount of vapour? I remember reading it increased atmospheric water content by like 10%. It's so unimaginable to me that it simply is not related to record years.
  - jfengel 3y ago
    Water vapor doesn't remain in the air for long. Unlike CO2 and sulfur dioxide, water vapor condenses to liquid water and falls out of the atmosphere. So a volcano's water vapor effects (warming) can last days, while the sulfur dioxide effects (cooling) will last months or years.

1vuio0pswjnm7 3y ago

https://web.archive.org/web/20240410153850if_/https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/10/climate/ocean-heat-records.html https://web.archive.org/web/20240410153850if_/https://www.ny...

RetroTechie 3y ago

The scary bit here is that it's surprising even the experts (climate scientists). If they don't have an accurate understanding of what's happening, how to predict what will happen further on?

veunes 3y ago
It's scary, agree, but there are often uncertainties and challenges in predicting future climate trends