Climate Change(d)?

[Jimmy Higgins]

As I said I forgot thermal expansion of sea water.

A significant factor. A 1 °C increase in the mean temperature of the entire ocean*, would raise global mean sea level by over thre quarters of a meter! Of course there are thermally stratified areas of ocean that would mix at different speeds, and Santa Monica will probably be ok well past the lifetime of its only resident that matters.

* afaik that would mean several degrees of warming in the "hot spots", while the depths are barely effected. But the influence on weather is mainly driven by surface temps, so... bad news will likely precede any such sea-level rise.

When you say the "entire ocean" are you talking shallow surface area or total volume? That sounds like a total volume claim, as water is generally incompressible and "shallow" bodies of the surface water shouldn't possibly be able to expand that much. And I don't think we are going to see the entire volume of ocean warm that much.

 

[Elixir]

As I said I forgot thermal expansion of sea water.

A significant factor. A 1 °C increase in the mean temperature of the entire ocean*, would raise global mean sea level by over thre quarters of a meter! Of course there are thermally stratified areas of ocean that would mix at different speeds, and Santa Monica will probably be ok well past the lifetime of its only resident that matters.

* afaik that would mean several degrees of warming in the "hot spots", while the depths are barely effected. But the influence on weather is mainly driven by surface temps, so... bad news will likely precede any such sea-level rise.

When you say the "entire ocean" are you talking shallow surface area or total volume? That sounds like a total volume claim, as water is generally incompressible and "shallow" bodies of the surface water shouldn't possibly be able to expand that much. And I don't think we are going to see the entire volume of ocean warm that much.

Right. The surface would warm a LOT by the time the challenger deep went up a full degree. I don't know what percent of all the water in the oceans are involved in the "conveyor" currents, but that is the part that matters most to climate. OTOH, evidence suggests that sea levels have varied by hundreds of feet just in the last few milennia. I think most of that variance is due to ice formation and melt, not thermal expansion and contraction, but it's still a biggie as far as currently low lying areas are concerned.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

As I said I forgot thermal expansion of sea water.

A significant factor. A 1 °C increase in the mean temperature of the entire ocean*, would raise global mean sea level by over thre quarters of a meter! Of course there are thermally stratified areas of ocean that would mix at different speeds, and Santa Monica will probably be ok well past the lifetime of its only resident that matters.

* afaik that would mean several degrees of warming in the "hot spots", while the depths are barely effected. But the influence on weather is mainly driven by surface temps, so... bad news will likely precede any such sea-level rise.

Yup, we are already seeing problems with ocean water warm enough that it just keeps feeding a hurricane parked on top.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

As I said I forgot thermal expansion of sea water.

A significant factor. A 1 °C increase in the mean temperature of the entire ocean*, would raise global mean sea level by over thre quarters of a meter! Of course there are thermally stratified areas of ocean that would mix at different speeds, and Santa Monica will probably be ok well past the lifetime of its only resident that matters.

* afaik that would mean several degrees of warming in the "hot spots", while the depths are barely effected. But the influence on weather is mainly driven by surface temps, so... bad news will likely precede any such sea-level rise.

When you say the "entire ocean" are you talking shallow surface area or total volume? That sounds like a total volume claim, as water is generally incompressible and "shallow" bodies of the surface water shouldn't possibly be able to expand that much. And I don't think we are going to see the entire volume of ocean warm that much.

It would be very unlikely if we don't.

The air is already +1.5C. The depths are a source of heat (geothermal), surface temps are solar input + geothermal - radiation to space. Geothermal won't change, why should we see an equilibrium state where the water warms less than the air? It will take a long time but it's going to happen.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Right. The surface would warm a LOT by the time the challenger deep went up a full degree. I don't know what percent of all the water in the oceans are involved in the "conveyor" currents, but that is the part that matters most to climate. OTOH, evidence suggests that sea levels have varied by hundreds of feet just in the last few milennia. I think most of that variance is due to ice formation and melt, not thermal expansion and contraction, but it's still a biggie as far as currently low lying areas are concerned.

Exactly. Ignore the big changes, they can only happen with cooling. But humanity has a strong preference for living very close to sea level. A large portion of the major cities of the world are at the junction of a river and the ocean--thus likely on a river delta, and river deltas are very flat things.

 

[steve_bank]

As I said I forgot thermal expansion of sea water.

A significant factor. A 1 °C increase in the mean temperature of the entire ocean*, would raise global mean sea level by over thre quarters of a meter! Of course there are thermally stratified areas of ocean that would mix at different speeds, and Santa Monica will probably be ok well past the lifetime of its only resident that matters.

* afaik that would mean several degrees of warming in the "hot spots", while the depths are barely effected. But the influence on weather is mainly driven by surface temps, so... bad news will likely precede any such sea-level rise.

You win. I surrender.

 

[steve_bank]

When upper ocean warms and lower ocean stays cool that affects convection currents. Currents affect marine life and weather.

In heat transfer water and air are both consider fluids. Instead of water imagine the oceans as air. It might give you a better picture.

The ocean water and atmosphere above form a thermodynamic continuum.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

As I said I forgot thermal expansion of sea water.

A significant factor. A 1 °C increase in the mean temperature of the entire ocean*, would raise global mean sea level by over thre quarters of a meter! Of course there are thermally stratified areas of ocean that would mix at different speeds, and Santa Monica will probably be ok well past the lifetime of its only resident that matters.

* afaik that would mean several degrees of warming in the "hot spots", while the depths are barely effected. But the influence on weather is mainly driven by surface temps, so... bad news will likely precede any such sea-level rise.

When you say the "entire ocean" are you talking shallow surface area or total volume? That sounds like a total volume claim, as water is generally incompressible and "shallow" bodies of the surface water shouldn't possibly be able to expand that much. And I don't think we are going to see the entire volume of ocean warm that much.

It would be very unlikely if we don't.

The air is already +1.5C. The depths are a source of heat (geothermal), surface temps are solar input + geothermal - radiation to space. Geothermal won't change, why should we see an equilibrium state where the water warms less than the air? It will take a long time but it's going to happen.

My emphasis added to explain why we won't.

 

[bilby]

When upper ocean warms and lower ocean stays cool that affects convection currents.

And that is already happening.



See all that cold water around Greenland? The ice sheet is melting, and the fresh water sits on top of the denser salt water of the Atlantic, floating in an area where cold salt water used to sink.

The effect on the Gulf Stream is visible as a pale arc stretching from Florida to the UK; The even larger impact on the Labrador current can be seen at the middle of that arc, where the surface water of the Gulf Stream is far colder (and that of the Labrador current immediately to the north is far hotter) than the thirty year average.

This is going to seriously fuck up the UK if the trend continues; Though arguably as it was the English who started the whole 'burn all the coal' fad (aka 'The Industrial Revolution'), perhaps that's poetic justice.

 

[Elixir]

This is going to seriously fuck up the UK if the trend continues

Yup. Funny thing, this has been modeled and predicted for decades by reputable scientific process. And it is happening as repeatedly predicted, except possibly faster. Great thermal graphic!

 

[steve_bank]

Locally we can see things tend to go to equilibrium.

A basic overview.

Put a pot of hot water on the counter and mass of the room and the pot of water come to an equilibrium temperature. Assuming mass of room and all its contents are much greater than the pot of water and the room is well insulated practically speaking you can say the pot of water cones to room temp. To the pot as a source the room and its mass is the ultimate heat sink.


But heat goes through the walls to the outside environment. To us on the Earth the ultimate sink is the CMBR which looks like a black body at about 3 degrees K.

So the Earth wants to go to equilibrium with the CMBR.


Put a spherical black body deep in space at 100c. It simultaneously absorbs energy from the background and radiates energy away. As long as the sphere temp is greater than the background temp more energy will be radiated than absorbed..When the absorbed radiation equals the radiated energy the sphere is in equilibrium with the background.

Ignoring mass like atmosphere that escapes into space the Earth is a black body. Energy leaves and arrives by radiation.

Some incoming radiation is reelected some absorbed. Some of the heat generated in the environment is radiated away. Heat that does not escape shows up as a rise in temperature.

In a one room cabin out in the open in the winter turn on an electric heater. If the amount of heat generated by the heater is greater than the heat leaving through the walls room temp goes up.


If the Space Shuttle could not open the cargo bay doors exposing the radiators it would overheat and have to come down.


Internal natural heat in the Earth comes from things like natural fission, hot core, and plate tectonics. Plus human created heat. Plus net solar radiation absorption.

When heat on the Earth is greater than the radiated heat temp goes up. How heat is distributed in the environment is climate sconce.

Amount of heat radiated per second into s[ace depends on emissivity and total surface area.

Earth's surface emissivity is a unitless value that measures its efficiency in emitting thermal infrared radiation, with a global average surface emissivity of about 0.95. However, the emissivity varies by location, with deserts having lower values (around \(0.65\)-\(0.99\)) and areas with vegetation, water, and ice having much higher values (above \(0.95\)). This variation is due to differences in surface composition.

Plenty of info on the net on thermal radiation, radiative cooling, and black bodies.


I do not think the Earth has ever been in any kind of equilibrium state. Surface conditions have been in a variable zone that allows life as we know it.

Ice ages come and go.

 

[Shadowy Man]

So the Earth wants to go to equilibrium with the CMBR.

just one half of it.

 

[bilby]

So the Earth wants to go to equilibrium with the CMBR.

just one half of it.

The other half wants to go to equilibrium with the Sun's photosphere; I am not sure that either circumstance would be hugely desirable for humans, but at least at 5,700 Kelvins we won't have to scrape Nitrogen crystals off our windscreens before driving to work.

 

[Shadowy Man]

So the Earth wants to go to equilibrium with the CMBR.

just one half of it.

The other half wants to go to equilibrium with the Sun's photosphere; I am not sure that either circumstance would be hugely desirable for humans, but at least at 5,700 Kelvins we won't have to scrape Nitrogen crystals off our windscreens before driving to work.

As we say, it’s a dry heat.

 

[steve_bank]

In thermodynamics it all depends on where you draw the system boundary.

If you make the system the Earth and Sun then the system still sees the universe as a sink

You can call a kitchen a system. The stove and refrigerator want to go to equilibrium with each other, but the room wants to go to equilibrium with the outside environment.

 

[Swammerdami]

I do want to compose a post about ocean ecology, but first let me correct a misconception which has been confessed to recently.

... Santa Monica will probably be ok well past the lifetime of its only resident that matters.

If you're referring to our distinguished climatologist Mr. Swizz, he has recently informed us that he is a "Valley guy." (If young female denizens of the San Fernando Valley are called "Valley girls" shouldn't their oppositely gendered neighbors be called "Valley guys"?) In other words, he needs to make field trips to enjoy the balmy beaches of Santa Monica.

I don't know how rigidly the geographic parameters of the "San Fernando Valley" are enforced. AFAIK there is no particular government entity with that as part of its name, but the very word "valley"

From Middle English valey, valeye, from Anglo-Norman valey, Old French valee (compare French vallée)​

[(plural valleys or (obsolete) vallies) -- An elongated depression cast between hills or mountains,]​

should give us a strong clue. The City of Calabasas is at the extreme Southwest corner of the Valley, with rugged mountains to traverse if you want to get to Santa Monica to the South. I'll guess that Mr. Swizz just takes "the" 405 or "the" 101 to cross the mountains between the Valley and his favorite beach.

Kudos to Swiz for taking that trip regularly and keeping us informed of SM's weather. I do have one disappointment however. From his location in SFV he is significantly closer to Edwards AFB than we previously thought. He was given the assignment of reporting its weather (Spoiler alert: In the summer it is MUCH hotter than Santa Monica but has declined repeated requests for such reports. Even after we offered to start a GoFundMe campaign to buy him a tank of gasoline for the trip.

 

[steve_bank]

An example of local weather affecting local weather a long ways away.

We just got hammered with the Pineapple Express a stream of water originating around the Hawaiian islands,

Record river creating and flooding.

Atmospheric river - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

An atmospheric river (AR) is a narrow corridor or filament of concentrated moisture in the atmosphere. Other names for this phenomenon are tropical plume, tropical connection, moisture plume, water vapor surge, and cloud band.[1][2]
Two wide photos showing a long stream of clouds ranging over the Pacific Ocean
Composite satellite photos of an atmospheric river connecting Asia to North America in October

Atmospheric rivers consist of narrow bands of enhanced water vapor transport, typically along the boundaries between large areas of divergent surface air flow, including some frontal zones in association with extratropical cyclones that form over the oceans.[3][4][5][6] Pineapple Express storms are the most commonly represented and recognized type of atmospheric rivers; the name is due to the warm water vapor plumes originating over the Hawaiian tropics that follow various paths towards western North America, arriving at latitudes from California and the Pacific Northwest to British Columbia and even southeast Alaska.[7][8][9]

The term was originally coined by researchers Reginald Newell and Yong Zhu of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the early 1990s to reflect the narrowness of the moisture plumes involved.[3][5][10] Atmospheric rivers are typically several thousand kilometers long and only a few hundred kilometers wide, and a single one can carry a greater flux of water than Earth's largest river, the Amazon River.[4] There are typically 3–5 of these narrow plumes present within a hemisphere at any given time. These have been increasing[11] in intensity slightly over the past century.

Warmer water around Hawaii means more evaporation of seawater and m ore moisture in the atmospheric river.

Global warming is making atmospheric rivers (ARs) more intense, frequent, and moisture-laden, leading to heavier rainfall, increased flooding, and landslides, while also shifting their paths poleward, creating drier conditions in some subtropical areas (like California) and riskier conditions (like glacier melt) in polar regions, with warmer temps causing more rain and less snow. A warmer atmosphere holds more water vapor (about 4% more per 1°F), fueling these "rivers in the sky" to deliver extreme precipitation, but their exact regional impacts vary, affecting water supply, infrastructure, and ecosystems worldwide.

 

[Elixir]

our distinguished climatologist Mr. Swizz, he has recently informed us that he is a "Valley guy."

WUT?
I have suffered some disillusionments lately, but this takes the cake.
You telling me that the continuous stream of 72° days he reports, comes from Palmdale or somewhere? (It’s 38° in Palmdale at the moment - I didn’t think a Swiz could survive that!)
The entire SF valley is subject to radical temperature flux.
Has the Swiz perpetrated a fraud upon us? Is THAT why he likes The Felon so much?

 

[Shadowy Man]

Wouldn’t it be Valley Boy? “Guy” would go with “gal” or “doll”, right?

Palmdale isn’t in the San Fernando Valley. Maybe he lives in Reseda, where it is predicted to be 73 and sunny today