by Jim Johnstone and Judith Curry
With the Atlantic hurricane season underway, we are closely monitoring the exceptionally warm SSTs in the Atlantic. This post describes what has been happening and why.
Atlantic SSTs
Sea surface temperatures (SSTs) over much of the North Atlantic are exceptionally high in late June 2023, due largely to a period of rapid warming that began around March-April.
Figure 1. SST anomalies on June 27, 2023 (top) and daily time series for regions marked above.
Daily SST time series in Fig. 1 show the recent SST evolution in several regions, marked in the map above, including the eastern Pacific Niño3 region, the North Atlantic Arc, the Caribbean Sea and the tropical North Atlantic Main Development Region (MDR). North Atlantic SST indices show evidence of irregular warming since March-April and peak warmth in early June. Warm conditions in the eastern equatorial Pacific reflect current El Niño conditions, which have intensified steadily since the beginning of 2023.
Local SST anomalies ≥1°C (1995-2019 baseline) are present throughout a basin-scale ‘Arc’ pattern that represents the leading natural structure of coherent SST variability on a wide range of time scales (Fig 1). The exceptional magnitude of recent North Atlantic warming can be seen in monthly Arc-averaged SST anomalies back to 1980, illustrated in Figure 2. Following a period of relatively little variability since 2020, Arc SST elevated steeply over the past several months, reaching a historic maximum in June.
Figure 2. Monthly Arc-averaged SST anomalies from 1980 to June 2023.
Atmospheric circulation patterns
June atmospheric conditions over the North Atlantic are also highly unusual, as indicated by a North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) index anomaly nearly 3 standard deviations below the monthly average. The NAO is defined by the subtropical – subpolar difference in atmospheric sea-level pressure (SLP) anomalies, and approximately reflects the intensity of the low-level atmospheric circulation over the North Atlantic basin. Extreme low NAO values in June are consistent with a very weak subtropical high (Bermuda High) and relatively stagnant surface winds, involving weakness of the midlatitude westerly flow and the tropical-subtropical easterly trade winds.
The climatological June SLP and surface wind patterns are shown in the left panel of Fig. 3. Conditions in June 2023, in the center panel, show a remarkably weak subtropical high and an absence of westerly surface winds in the midlatitudes. June 2023 SLP and wind anomalies, shown in the right panel, consist of unusually low pressure and cyclonic circulation over much of the basin, which reflects weakness of the mean anticyclonic flow pattern.
Figure 3. June patterns of atmospheric SLP and surface winds. Left: June averages (1995-2022). Center: Conditions in June 2023. Right: June 2023 anomalies (observations minus climatology). The + and – markers in the left panel show the centers of action of the North Atlantic Oscillation, calculated as the subtropical (+) minus subpolar (-) SLP anomaly difference.
An extreme negative NAO index in June was preceded by moderately negative anomalies in both March and April (Table 1), which led to repeated monthly warming of the North Atlantic Arc and extreme cumulative effects by late June. The Arc warming observed from February to June (+0.85°C) exceeds the total net Atlantic warming of the past century.
Table 1. Monthly anomalies of the NAO index, Arc SST tendency (dSST) and SST. March, April and June (red) were months of negative NAO anomalies (low subtropical SLP and weak surface winds) and Arc warming.
Figure 4 illustrates the magnitude of the June NAO anomaly in context of the historical record since 1980. The very low June 2023 NAO value is not unprecedented in the monthly climatological values; however, it is extremely low relative the previous June values and spring (Mar-Jun) values.
Figure 4. North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) index, defined by the normalized subtropical (Azores) minus subpolar (Iceland) SLP anomaly difference. Top: Monthly anomalies (all months), with March-June 2023 values highlighted in red. Middle: June values. Bottom: March-June averages.
Coupled anomalies and changes
Atmospheric anomalies associated with the NAO are primary drivers of Arc SST perturbations over short (monthly to seasonal) time periods. Figure 5 illustrates monthly anomalies of net shortwave (solar) surface heat flux, turbulent (latent/evaporative plus sensible) heat flux, total heat flux, and SST tendencies. Negative NAO anomalies correspond to negative subtropical SLP anomalies and weak trade winds to the south, including the MDR. Weak trades warm the underlying sea surface primarily by hindering evaporative cooling, but affect tropical SSTs through several complementary mechanisms, simultaneously favoring warming through reductions in stratocumulus cloudiness, Saharan dust advection, upper-ocean mixing and coastal upwelling off NW Africa. Overall, the turbulent flux associated with weak winds has dominated over the shortwave flux in warming the Atlantic.
Figure 5. Monthly downward surface heat flux anomalies and SST tendencies from March through June 2023. Arc warming in March, April and June can be primarily explained by weak surface winds (due to – NAO anomalies) and low rates of evaporative cooling (positive turbulent heat flux).
The recurrence and growth of extreme NAO- conditions and Arc warmth in recent months is likely due in part to positive SST-atmosphere feedbacks. NAO / Arc patterns in the atmosphere / upper ocean are closely related to those of the Atlantic Meridional Mode (AMM), wherein warm SSTs and weak trade winds can be sustained or amplified through mutual reinforcement.
Another contributor to the remarkable spring changes in the North Atlantic may be the broader tropical warming involving the transition to El Niño conditions. Surface warming in the tropics typically leads to quasi-uniform elevation of tropospheric temperatures and geopotential heights throughout the tropical belt from ~20°N to 20°S. Spring increases in 250 hPa geopotential heights (Z250) over the tropics were accompanied by declines immediately poleward over the subtropical NE Pacific and North Atlantic, while SLP anomalies dropped steeply in a coherent tropical zone from the central Pacific to the eastern Atlantic.
Figure 6. Anomalies of 250 hPa geopotential heights (Z250) and SLP during JFM and AMJ 2023. Increases in tropical Z250, declines in subtropical Z250 and declines in tropical SLP occurred simultaneously over the E Pacific and N Atlantic in early 2023.
African dust, pollution, wild fire smoke and Hunga-Tonga
As shown in Figure 5, the extremely warm Atlantic SSTs this season is partly due to anomalous radiative warming of the surface. The twitterati have blamed many factors: CO2 emissions, lower amount of sulfate particles from clearer shipping fuels, Hunga-Tonga eruption, and low levels of African dust. And now the Canadian wildfires are a factor. These are all relatively minor factors compared to the dominant impact of variations in cloudiness.
Atmospheric particulates have been reduced globally from cleaner fuels for shipping that were mandated in 2020, which produce fewer sulfate particles. Sulfate particles have a cooling effect by reflecting solar radiation. Cleaner air means less solar radiation is reflected, which contributes to surface warming. Indirect effects include darkening of subtropical clouds, through cloud microphysical effects, which reduces the reflectivity of these clouds. The ocean warming effect of this would be largest in the Northern Hemisphere, and subtropical clouds are most susceptible to this kind of modification. In the image below you can see the ship tracks from the brighter clouds, that are more reflective of solar radiation (these ship tracks have now been substantially reduced) [link]
Particulates from wildfire smoke has a similar effect on reducing the solar warming at the surface. My contacts in New York estimated that solar power production was cut in half during the period when a thick layer of smoke from the Canadian wildfires. For smoke trajectories into the North Atlantic, there will be variable surface cooling, depending on the smoke trajectory and optical depth
African dust storms have the same effect in terms of reflecting solar radiation and thus cooling the surface. Dust storms have been anomalously weak so far (from Michael Lowry):
But the bottom line is that a major Saharan dust outbreak doesn’t have a big impact on sea surface temperatures: “Saharan dust outbreaks can decrease the surface shortwave radiation up to 190 W/m2, and an analysis of the corresponding SSTskin changes using a thermal skin model suggests dust-induced cooling effects as large as −0.24 K during daytime and a warming effect of up of 0.06 K during daytime and nighttime respectively.” [link]
Another radiative effect is from the Hunga-Tonga eruption in 2022. Normally volcanoes spew sulfate particles in the stratosphere, which reflects sunlight and so has a cooling effect on the surface. However the Hunga-Tonga eruption was associated with little sulfur dioxide (which converts into sulfate particles, with an estimated cooling impact of 0.004oC in 2022. The main climatic impact of Hunga-Tonga eruption is the large amount of water vapor that was ejected into the stratosphere from the Hunga-Tonga volcanic eruption, which is estimated to have increased stratospheric water content by 10-15% with a 0.034 oC global warming over the next 5 years. [link]
Here’s a screen shot from Zoom Earth on 6/24, showing smoke from the Canadian wildfires and African dust. The whiteness of the smoke in the satellite image, relative to the Saharan Dust, indicates the large optical depth of the smoke (which is proportional to the surface cooling effect).
Summary
The extreme North Atlantic conditions that developed in recent months are likely due to a combination of dynamical factors, including stochastic weather anomalies, regional positive feedbacks and global-scale changes. The high rate of recent Arc warming is particularly noticeable due to the extreme SST anomalies it produced; however comparable warming over periods of ~4 to 6 months occurred previously in late winter to spring seasons of 1983, 1987, 1989 and 2010 (Figure 2), which preceded a wide range of late summer hurricane anomalies.
The dominant cause of the warm SSTs is dynamical (atmospheric circulations) that modify surface wind speeds (evaporation; apparently the largest factor) and clouds (solar radiation). Minor non-cloud radiative impacts: Hunga-Tonga is a global effect, sulfate ship tracks is local ocean effect primarily in northern hemisphere, wildfire impact on oceans is relatively rare and event driven, and African dust is a regular summer feature that is characterized by discrete events. Cloud variability in most locations will dominate over aerosol forcing in terms of impacts on sea surface temperatures. Some minor Atlantic Ocean cooling can be expected with Canadian smoke and Saharan dust.
Very good analysis. Perhaps one could add that the (very low) tradewinds hindered the Ekman transport to the west, compareable to the Pacific ElNino events with “west wind bursts”. Some call those events “Atlantic Nino” which happend in the months before June 2023.
More tropical storms are forming in the tropical eastern Pacific.
https://i.ibb.co/Fg4Pkb9/b6661de4-ab88-49aa-813a-7fe3078a5854.jpg
At present, due to the influx of air from the north, the surface temperature of the North Atlantic is clearly falling and will continue to fall.
https://i.ibb.co/6b9wWk7/cdas-sflux-ssta7diff-atl-1.png
http://tropic.ssec.wisc.edu/real-time/mtpw2/product.php?color_type=tpw_nrl_colors&prod=europe×pan=24hrs&anim=anigf
North Atlantic SSTs have increased 2 degrees C since the day you claimed they were “clearly falling”.
https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/
A fall of water surface temp by winds does not explain the basic cause why temp originally rose. I have sent a fully plausible and most comprehemsive analyzis of the cause so far not publiched in this forum. My research tells that the Soviet Union caused this by arrangements at iland Novaja Zemlja.
I have a fully pausible analy<zi<s to the issue of rizimng temp at water surface in te Arctic Region. I have written that mny times to thsi forum and none is publiches,
Regretfully my earlier reply was by mistake transmitted as a too early version prior to final text corrections,. This is the correct version. My bad
A fall of water surface temp by winds does not explain the basic cause why temp originally rose. I have sent a fully plausible and most comprehensive analyzis of the cause in this forum. My research shows that the Soviet Union caused this by arrangements at the 4,000 meter down sea bed outside the island of Novaja Zemlja.
I have published a fully plausible analyzis to the issue of rizing temp at water surface in the Arctic Region. I have written that above July 18, 2023 at 6:19 am | Reply
Active Atlantic brings rainfall across Europe.
https://www.tropicaltidbits.com/analysis/ocean/cdas-sflux_sst_global_1.png
https://i.ibb.co/RhDYQJk/Zrzut-ekranu-2023-07-02-194427.png
A further drop in temperatures in the North Atlantic and British Isles is in the forecast, including heavier rainfall.
https://earth.nullschool.net/#2023/07/06/1700Z/wind/isobaric/700hPa/overlay=temp/orthographic=-16.10,54.20,853
“The twitterati have blamed many factors: CO2 emissions, lower amount of sulfate particles from clearer shipping fuels, Hunga-Tonga eruption, and low levels of African dust. And now the Canadian wildfires are a factor. These are all relatively minor factors compared to the dominant impact of variations in cloudiness.” In other words, continue to burn fossil fuels; there is nothing to worry about.
The other words are yours?
When the solar wind speed increases, the geomagnetic wave causes an increase in the speed of the jet current in the tropopause. This wave reaches the troposphere after about two weeks. The graph below shows the strong waving of solar wind strength. During periods of weak solar wind, the jet current slows down and long-lasting baric systems form.
https://i.ibb.co/dkZDDNh/plot-image-1.png
The solar wind in the 25th cycle is weak on average and very rarely exceeds 600 km/s.
I wrote in WUWT that due to solar wind spike (strong increase and large decrease seen in the chart above), a strong earthquake may occur in early July.
6.9 Tonga Islands
Event Summary
Date/Time
(UTC) 2023-07-02 10:27:43 UTC
(8 hours, 13 minutes ago)
Location Tonga Islands
Magnitude mw 6.9
Latitude 17.853° S
Longitude 174.9373° W
Depth 224.975 km
The forecast for July 7 shows a deep stationary and long-term cold low in the North Atlantic.
https://earth.nullschool.net/#2023/07/07/0600Z/wind/surface/level/overlay=mean_sea_level_pressure/orthographic=-14.96,60.23,853/loc=-15.426,55.016
So what does this mean for (a) frequency and strength of Atlantic Hurricanes; (b) sunshine and rainfall in New England this summer; and (c) stories about impending climate catastrophes?
I’d be interested in seeing the data prior to 1980. I know it makes a difference in analyzing hurricane data if one takes a longer viewpoint. Michael “Hockeystick” Mann used short-term data to prove hurricanes are becoming more extreme.
Circulation now favors hurricanes in the Atlantic. This is the Atlantic’s La Niña.
http://tropic.ssec.wisc.edu/real-time/mtpw2/webAnims/tpw_nrl_colors/natl/mimictpw_natl_latest.gif
https://www.tropicaltidbits.com/analysis/ocean/cdas-sflux_sst_atl_1.png
Summer
The solar cycle influence has caused this phenomenon:
All the boreal summer northern ocean positive anomalies resulted from long duration high total solar irradiance during the northern-most excursion (aphelion) of the sub-solar point.
In 2023, TSIS TSI > my sun-ocean decadal warming threshold; and the ocean responded. Witness ocean solar supersensitivity:
https://i.postimg.cc/sfhfndqm/Solar-Supersensitivity-in-2023.png
The same mechanism was in play six months ago in the southern ocean, when TSI was high during the perihelion, the southern ocean had the bright red positive anomalies, not the north ocean.
The tropics warmed up from high solar irradiance during the northward passage of the sub-solar point since last December, warming the El Niño basin-wide up to today.
Now that the sub-solar point is moving southward, the tropics will warm even more from the currently high total solar irradiance, which will drive global warming even higher, as it already has.
Stronger Niño anomalies will likely result by Dec/January as long as sunspots persists above my sun-ocean decadal warming threshold of 95 v2 SN. So far so good…
If solar cycle 25 peaks next year, look for extreme warmth again next year in the North Atlantic and elsewhere from high solar activity, along with sea ice extent losses.
The N. Atlantic will cool soon as the sub-solar point goes south.
So, were any of the conditions which are suggested to cause a wavy jet stream in this paper present this year? https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-39466-6
It sounds like no.
It seems the conditions for Sudden Stratospheric Warming events are going to be very elevated for the next 12-18 months. SSW events are really disruptive to the jet stream and have led to some extreme weather events like that winter storm Uri in 2021.
June 28, 2023
https://www.severe-weather.eu/long-range-2/winter-2023-2024-qbo-polar-vortex-el-nino-weather-impact-united-states-canada-europe-fa/
“A large-scale atmospheric phenomenon is currently changing its phase high in the atmosphere. Called “the heartbeat of the atmosphere,” it has a known effect on the Winter weather and will combine its influence with the El Nino event to impact the weather patterns in the 2023/2024 Winter season.”
When are we ‘gonna learn? We quickly figure out it’s icy cold in the Arctic and Antarctic when some greenies set off on an expedition to prove the Earth is doomed by global warming. This sort of hubris usually ends in some Herculean rescue effort, amputated and frostbitten fingers and eco-whackpots being rescued by copters or an oil tanker.
A turning current in the equatorial Pacific is trying to create an El Niño. However, the circulation in the central Pacific remains consistent with La Niña, as seen in the cool eastern Pacific, except in the Niño 1.2 region. The increase in SOI indicates further cooling of the southeast Pacific.
https://climatereanalyzer.org/wx/todays-weather/input/gfs_pacific-sat_sstanom_d1.png
https://www.longpaddock.qld.gov.au/soi/
The circulation in the South Pacific will not change until December, as the stratospheric polar vortex in the south is strong.
https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/stratosphere/strat-trop/gif_files/time_pres_TEMP_MEAN_ALL_SH_2023.png
It can be seen that the Niño 3.4 index hovers around 0.8 C and there is no upward trend, with precipitation in northern Australia.
https://www.tropicaltidbits.com/analysis/ocean/nino34.png
Judith – excellent analysis. The unusual weather pattern was clearly seen here in the UK, with domination of the area north of the UK by High pressure systems and persistent winds from the East. This contributed to the unusually warm June here.
Meanwhile, the whole pattern seems to have flipped at the end of June. Now, Low pressure dominates the area north of the UK and westerly winds have become established, with the “Azores High” back in its customary location
I’d be interested in knowing how ‘extremely’ and extreme’ are defined these days when talking about the weather. If a particular temperature record is broken by 0.1c (the previous record having been in 19 something or other) in what way does that 0.1c amount to ‘extreme’?
In the UK last summer we had a few records broken. There were a few wildfires, a little property damage and no deaths. I don’t know what the cost was but we seemed to cope OK and we’re all here this summer.
Is something that has virtually no impact on us ‘extreme’?
Thank you for an interesting and thought-provoking article, Judy.
North Atlantic Arc is not an established name as it represents different regions to different people. What we are seeing so warm in the Atlantic is the return currents of the North Atlantic gyre.
There are plenty of anomalies in weather patterns since spring. The early start of El Niño is one of them. It is usually phase-locked to the boreal winter circulation, starting in late summer to early fall. After the vernal equinox, the Southern Hemisphere circulation intensifies. The NH Hadley cell greatly weakens and the SH Hadley cell intrudes into the NH following the ITCZ displacement into the warmer hemisphere. That’s why an El Niño starting in boreal spring is so unusual. It is a time for El Niño to die, not to be born. A lot of the heat brought to the surface will be directed to the SH.
After three years of La Niña, the ocean has accumulated a great amount of subsurface heat. An atmospheric anomaly is bringing it to the surface ahead of time in both basins. In the Atlantic, the northward western boundary of the gyre does not show an anomaly, indicating normal heat transfer to the atmosphere. The southward eastern boundary current is very warm, and the heat is not coming from the Arctic. It is being brought to the surface by the atmospheric anomaly. The very negative NAO drives the circulation and storm track southward. We had double the normal amount of precipitation this June in Spain and I suppose it was dry further North.
So the heat is being recycled back into the tropics in the Atlantic and it will be interesting to see Arctic sea ice extent this September.
I personally don’t know and can’t speculate on the origin of the atmospheric anomaly. I suppose we will find out as a lot of people are looking into it. If I had to guess, I suspect the change anticipates the long-awaited start of the AMO decline that I was expecting for around 2025.
What becomes clearer to me the more I study climate is that the atmosphere rules climate change and the ocean does what is told. That all these changes in the Atlantic and Pacific are taking place simultaneously tells us it is the atmosphere running the show. There is no way both basins can decide in the same month to start behaving differently on their own.
Since the atmosphere lacks a memory, this indicates our “experts” are fundamentally wrong about the drivers of multidecadal climate variability.
I wonder what this will do to antarctic ice mass. I imagine the open water and heat will lead to mass gains in the interior.
That’s why an El Niño starting in boreal spring is so unusual.
What becomes clearer to me the more I study climate is that the atmosphere rules climate change and the ocean does what is told.
That all these changes in the Atlantic and Pacific are taking place simultaneously tells us it is the atmosphere running the show.
If there’s one constant on this earth it’s your lack understanding.
The ocean drives the lower troposphere, leading by two months.
https://i.postimg.cc/ZYFFhYsw-/UAH-LT-v-Had-SST3.jpg
Hi Javier, i have a slightly different take. Shifts are driven from the atmosphere, but the ocean acts as a flywheel
My take is also different than yours. The equatorial ocean heat content is driving the central pacific wind with a two month lag.
Note the relationship between Equatorial Ocean Heat Content anomaly (EqOHCa) and Central Pacific Outgoing Longwave Radiation (CP OLR):
https://i.postimg.cc/nhXWr5GN/Ocean-Indices-lag-Eq-OHC.png
Also, via more cross-correlational analysis:
CP OLR↔CP Winds; 0 lag, r= .75
EqOHCa→CP OLR; leads by 2 months, r= -.69
EqOHCa→CP Winds; leads by 2 months, r= -.60
EqOHCa→Niño34; leads by 2 months, r= .73
Niño34→CP Winds; leads by 2 months, r= -.71
HadSST3→UAH LT; leads by 2 months, r= .70
Therefore shifting ocean heat drives the winds, not vice versa.
Indeed, single up-spikes in the SST of the extratropical Atlantic were also precursers for longer cooling phases in the AMO-area. https://i.imgur.com/n6ny7SR.png
Pingback: What’s causing the extremely warm temperatures in the North Atlantic? • Watts Up With That?
Pingback: What’s causing the extremely warm temperatures in the North Atlantic? • Watts Up With That? - Lead Right News
If you project the 1982-2010 trend the new “extreme” warming is right on track, hence not extreme. One could ask why the pause instead. Also the time series is so short that this could all be part of a long term natural cycle. Including a chaotic cycle in ocean circulation.
Pingback: What’s causing the extremely warm temperatures in the North Atlantic? | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
I’m curious what Dr. Curry’s take would be on this hysterical article about Pakistan.
While Pakistan is no stranger to monsoons, 2022 was unprecedented. Flooding lasted more than four months, and at its height left a third of the country submerged. The worst climate disaster in the country’s history, the floods were responsible for an economic hit of more than $30 billion, or roughly 10% of Pakistan’s 2021 economic output.
…
“Pakistan is an avatar for what happens when climate-vulnerable countries that are not climate-resilient are in the firing line of changed weather conditions,” says David Miliband, president of International Rescue Committee, a humanitarian aid group. “They’re on the front lines of something that’s going to be faced by other countries.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2023-07-02/pakistan-braces-for-heavy-rains-floods-after-30-billion-climate-disaster
Jim
This is what I had previously found on the 2010 flood. As usual the media didn’t bother to place the tragedy in some historical context. Unprecedented in the country’s history doesn’t really mean much since Pakistan has been around for only 76 years. If they would have researched the ancient history of flooding they would have found that the monsoons of that region have centennial and millennial variability and the region is naturally prone to flooding. Soon after nationhood they had major floods in the following years, per a 2022 report
“ According to the Federal Flood Commission, Pakistan has witnessed 28 super riverine floods in its 75-year history. The first recorded super flood was witnessed in 1950, followed by 1955, 1956, 1957, 1959, 1973, 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1981, 1983, 1984, 1988, 1992, 1994, 1995 and then every year since 2010..”
This is one of several findings about the flood
“ Non-Meteorological Causes of the Disaster
We offer here a geomorphological perspective on this flood catastrophe. The remote sensing data (Flood Inundation Chronology, GSA Supplemental Data [footnote 1]) agree with many of the findings reached by in-country water ministries (Khan, 2011), and this information does not support exceptional weather phenomena as the principal cause of the catastrophe. Levee failures led to the northern avulsion (Figs. 1–3), including in particular the 2.7 km break at the Tori Bund. The bund was in poor repair, had failed repeatedly in prior floods, by 2010 had lost 1.7 m from its design height due to erosion and poor maintenance, and was breached in advance of flood crest arrival.…”
https://rock.geosociety.org/net/gsatoday/archive/23/1/article/i1052-5173-23-1-4.htm
The media rarely do their job and provide facts and historical context. They are very good at being cheerleaders for AGW.
That’s what I was thinking was probably the case. Historical context is an anathema to the Church of Climate Doomers.
Pingback: Hot June? Blame It On The NAO, Not Global Warming | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
The blocked hurricane in the eastern Pacific is not changing position.
https://i.ibb.co/HdP3nSr/pobrane.png
It is not true that for 3 years of La Niña the Pacifik has accumulated a lot of heat. The amount of heat under the surface would have been greater if La Niña had been very strong, which it was not.
http://www.bom.gov.au/archive/oceanography/ocean_anals/IDYOC006/IDYOC006.202307.gif
Note how much energy a blocked hurricane (a patch of cold next to the California Peninsula) pulls from the ocean even to a depth of 150 meters.
The graphic above shows the operation of the return current at the equator, characteristic of the ENSO cycle. However, the atmospheric circulation in the central Pacific is not responding to this change.
https://earth.nullschool.net/#2023/07/03/1700Z/wind/surface/level/overlay=mean_sea_level_pressure/orthographic=-141.31,2.56,281
‘La Niña ‘recharges’ the ocean’ is a climate science myth.
There was no growth in SST, no big change in La Niña until after TSIS TSI exceeded the decadal sun-ocean warming threshold.
Where does that negative June NAO value of 2.85 come from?
https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/pna/nao.gefs.sprd2.png
High pressure in the north due to low water vapor.
Sorry.
https://i.ibb.co/QpV9G74/gfs-npole-sat-pwtr-d1.png
Look at my link, that is not a mean minus 2.85 for June. I wanted to know where the -2.85 figure came from.
Sorry, you can actually see only -2 in May.
Sorry.
2023,6,8,-0.3504211710512354
2023,6,9,-1.143718060009112
2023,6,10,-1.1190240261633
2023,6,11,-1.1673181827022765
2023,6,12,-1.4528122484845087
2023,6,13,-1.6636379440444689
2023,6,14,-1.941728300592438
2023,6,15,-2.32269634818354
2023,6,16,-1.9050265986459987
2023,6,17,-1.4049268865275608
2023,6,18,-1.047533884077515
2023,6,19,-0.9883117926297257
2023,6,20,-0.6492657046394342
2023,6,21,-0.2670851642090053
2023,6,22,-0.1436015882777877
2023,6,23,-0.07451039415043358
2023,6,24,0.6004205123280019
2023,6,25,1.2005292769389937
2023,6,26,0.8233164396986767
2023,6,27,0.38366671520971396
2023,6,28,0.44269263099850975
2023,6,29,-0.6838278663788697
2023,6,30,-2.116276197439802
2023,7,1,-2.212677460137168
Those daily values are less than a -2.85 monthly mean, but are more negative than the series which I posted which does not reach -1 through the whole of June. And you didn’t provide your source either!
The beginning of July in Europe promises to be without heat.
https://www.tropicaltidbits.com/analysis/ocean/cdas-sflux_ssta7diff_atl_1.png
This night will begin a big drop in temperature in the British Isles.
https://i.ibb.co/ZKZyK2r/Zrzut-ekranu-2023-07-03-224349.png
“What’s causing the extremely warm temperatures in the North Atlantic?”
CO2 is always the correct answer for all weather events. All CO2 all the time.
In the forecast, we see a cut-off loop of the jet stream with a cold spot in the North Atlantic. There will be a significant drop in surface temperatures in this area.
https://earth.nullschool.net/#2023/07/08/2200Z/wind/isobaric/500hPa/orthographic=-1.17,55.24,853
Amazing graphic. Thanks.
More hurricanes blocked in the eastern equatorial Pacific will cause surface temperatures in the region to drop.
https://i.ibb.co/Dr3mQfn/2614f63a-970f-44af-b087-d9eea990d9d1.jpg
Pingback: Hot June? Blame It On The NAO, Not Global Warming - Climate- Science.press
Here is a news flash. CO2 absorbs and emits 15-micron LWIR. No one denies the oceans are warming. Has anyone bothered to ask if 15-micron LWIR can warm water? Especially the deeper ocean? Isn’t that the first question that should be asked? If I claimed that I gained weight because I ate air, shouldn’t we ask if eating air can actually cause weight gain? 15-Micron LWIR doesn’t penetrate the oceans, nor will it warm them. That is the #1 experiment that can and won’t be run by the climate alarmists. We are spending trillion on a theory with no experimental data backing it. Visible radiation, 0.4 to 0.7 Microns warms the oceans. Blue light, 0.4 penetrates the oceans the furthest, that is why oceans are blue. If you want to know what is warming the oceans, and in turn the atmosphere above it, simply look at the cloud cover over the oceans. If there have been fewer clouds, which there has been, more warming visible radiation is reaching the oceans, and it has nothing to do with CO2. Simply look up the cloud data. The answers to climate change is hiding in plain sight and no one is looking.
I would be interested in reading any research papers you can share that shows the absorption and emission spectra of CO2.
It is a graphic found in any modern chemistry book.
https://ozonedepletiontheory.info/ImagePages/absorption-rhode/
Also, wavelengths have certain properties, and 15-Micron won’t penetrate water, and its energy is consistent with -80 C. Ice emits higher energy IR than CO2.
http://manoa.hawaii.edu/exploringourfluidearth/sites/default/files/Fig9.7-LightPenetration.jpg
Here is a US map of GDP distribution. Hurricanes that hit the yellow areas will do the most dollar damage. The yellow areas also are where GDP is concentrating over time, so storm damage in these area will likewise grow over time.
https://vividmaps.com/where-us-gdp-concentrated/
Why is UVB radiation increasing near the surface? Because the amount of ozone decreases during weak solar cycles, as indicated by the drop in temperature in the upper stratosphere. You can see that we are now at the peak of the 25th cycle, because the temperature in the upper stratosphere has increased. Nevertheless, solar activity is low.
https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/stratosphere/strat-trop/gif_files/time_pres_TEMP_ANOM_ALL_EQ_2023.png
https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/stratosphere/strat-trop/gif_files/time_pres_TEMP_ANOM_ALL_SH_2023.png
This solar cycle is higher intensity than expected right now. It’s pretty sad “they” can’t even get the solar model to work right.
https://www.swpc.noaa.gov/content/space-weather-enthusiasts-dashboard
Interestingly, although the stratospheric polar vortex in the south is strong, a steady weakening in the lower stratosphere over the South Pacific is evident. This will result in a stronger cooling of the Pacific during the winter.
https://i.ibb.co/nnvwTk2/gfs-z70-sh-f120.png
This is how scientific reasoning should be applied to Climate Science:
1) The Oceans Dominate the Climate
2) The Oceans are Warming
3) Visible Radiation, 0.4 to 0.7 Micron SWVR warms the oceans
4) Clouds are the main regulator of the amount of visible radiation reaching the oceans
5) There has been a trend of fewer clouds over the oceans caused by a changing Jet Stream (similar to the change that turned the Sahara from a savannah to desert before coal burning power plants)
6) Fewer clouds due to natural cycle changes has resulted in more warming visible radiation reaching the oceans and causing climate change. It has nothing to do with CO2.
Change my mind
Sea surface temperatures are a controller of low cloud cover. The decline in low cloud, and the increase in upper ocean heat content, are in concert with the warming of the AMO from 1995. And the AMO is normally warmer during each centennial solar minimum.
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/data/oceans/woa/DATA_ANALYSIS/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/GRAPHS/meantemp_0-700m.png
A look at Tulare Lake, California’s newest re-formed lake l GMA
https://youtu.be/8VgH-ahOE-k
Pingback: UK's Warm June Has A Natural Explanation - Leaps To 'Catastrophism' Are Baseless - Electroverse
The Church of Climate Doomers may be in for disapointment.
McKinsey & Co. joined the growing chorus warning that metals considered key to the clean-energy transition face shortages in coming years, potentially suppressing the adoption of electric cars, wind turbines and solar panels.
These deficits likely will slow global decarbonization efforts by raising supply-chain costs and, consequently, the prices of lower-carbon products, McKinsey said in a report released Wednesday. Trafigura Chief Executive Officer Jeremy Weir and BloombergNEF have expressed similar concerns.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-07-04/mckinsey-adds-to-warnings-of-metals-shortages-for-clean-energy
The Pope of the Church of Climate Doomers is getting rich off it.
It was reported by the Daily Wire that Mr. Gore’s personal net worth increased by more than $100 million because of his involvement with climate change. He has been criticized for his profiting from the situation which is still considered by many to be a hoax, while others call him a hero and one of the great humanitarians of our age.
https://moneyinc.com/al-gore-net-worth/
North Atlantic (70W-10W, 45N-65N) SST anomaly decreasing rapidly since June 23 from +1.1ºC to +0.5ºC so far.
https://www.tropicaltidbits.com/analysis/ocean/natlssta.png
The Climate Reanalyzer website uses a different area for the North Atlantic: 0 – 60W. 0 – 80N. It shows the temperature, not the anomaly. Still warming vs the average at this day.
Guess which one climate doomsters feature in their hysterics!
https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/
Pingback: Welche Ursache haben die extrem hohen Temperaturen des Nordatlantiks? | EIKE - Europäisches Institut für Klima & Energie
Pingback: Welche Ursache haben die extrem hohen Temperaturen des Nordatlantiks? – Aktuelle Nachrichten
A powerful cold low in the North Atlantic will cause a strong drop in ocean surface temperatures in the region.
https://i.ibb.co/VYD6x5v/gfs-cape-eur45-1.png
Pingback: Varmt vatten i Nordatlanten skapade klimatpanik - Klimatupplysningen
Pingback: Claims that UK’s temperature last month was “the hottest since records began” is a lie – The Expose
Hello
From 1950 to 1980 the Sovjets replaced used still active old technical nuclear reactors from a mass of electric powerstations around the Empire. The decision came of 4 circumstances: 1. these reactors were of a simple technique extremely cheap to produce so the economical lifetime overlorded the physical one . 2. The Empire had large deposits of uranium raw material. 3. The Empire controlled an infinite free of charge source to chill the nuclear reactor core process against a core melt down. 4. The Empire’s policymakers knew they would not be alive the very day a problem might occur. That resulted in a dump yard for active reactors at a dept of 4,000 m and +4 dgr C chilling water outside the island of Novaja Zemlja in the Arctic Sea. A conservative estimation tells a few 100 reactors at that see floor. It might be a thousand of them. Each of these will be active for 100,000 years depositing hundreds of degrees C 7/24. That heat must go somewhere and it will softly warm up the Arctic Sea and then by currencies to be spread South via the Atlantic and Berings Oceans. 100,000 years is along time for distribution of unwanted matter and it’s not possible to extinguish or slow down a nuclear core at an uncontrolled production.
The 4,000 m dept of the dump yard is the equal as the Titanic wreck far away but we know from the steel of that ship that salty waters is most corrosive to steel and the reactor No 1 at the bottom of the dump has been there since mid 50ties covered by an unknown level of other rosting reactors . It’s not IF it’s WHEN the rosting shell of No 1 turns opens for saltwater penetration and by extreme high pressure to flood straight into the active reactor core. Then it will explode and will crush the reactors above to a chain reaction and cascades of radiactive steam will rise to the atmosphere for centuries. Hot water goes upwards and warms the surface at the Arctic Sea where researchers have taken the emp-tests puzzled by the unexplained cause of the warm water. The consequenses are for anybody to consider. However, the intensive heat already today at that see floor can well be part of the warming up of the Arctic waters and as well for the frozen methane filled permafrost some 1500 m above exceeding melting the tundra to release CH4 more rapidly than the warm climate models achieve. These are circumstaces nobody discuss until devastation is knocking on the home doors. I have heard rumors that there has been a privately founded reward of $US10 mln to any daring madman going down in a Bathyscope to dig up the first reactor dump in order to inspect its rosticle level. 70 years of rosting steel around an overheated nuclear core prevents everybody to even think of the challenge. So when do we face an unknown number of instabile Thernobyl reactors to heat the entire Arctic Sea for 100,000 years ? The Titanic was inspected last time some 40 years ago. It sank 2012 and the last inspection was then around 1980. She had been at the equal sea floor then as the reactors oday for some 70 years in salty waters and the wreck was closely to collapse. Anybody can make a comparison.
God Bless the small children now in their prams to an adult life in this heritage.
Could this be the cause of the prominent warming area visible in the top left chart , in the second image, at: (?)
https://www.abeqas.com/earths-warming-and-cooling-surfaces/
Hej
Jag håller mig till axiomet Better Safe than Sorry. Min artikel nedan baseras på fakta som var och en kan studera på Nätet och jämföra med annat. Jag är beslutsam i frågan om att inte avfärda något, innan detta har grannlaga utretts. Historien är full av drömmare, som aldrig skulle kunna tro att något allvarligt inträffar i dennes egen trygga bubbla. Detta är ett resultat av en 60 årig indoktrinering att ingenting är oroande, eftersom alla nås av samhällets skydd. Jag anar att inte få trygghetsnarkomaner, som ojar sig över oro är influerade av Styrelsen för Psykologiskt Försvar.
Inte en enda av landets kontokortsanvändare kunde 1997 drömma om att någon kunde klara perimetern mot dataintrång i VISAs supersäkra identitetsregister och stjäla 5,000 fullständiga ID. Det händer inte mig bara andra. Inte kunde Ryssland invadera Ukraina heller. Och inte kunde Hitler attackera Sovjet. Och plast finns bara i små mängder i haven. Resten är skrämselpropaganda av överspända influencers. Överlarmande olyckskorpar är illa men Riskförnekare är värre. Det nu sagda bör ses mot det jag nedan har skrivit internationellt. Vissa kommer att säga att dessa reaktorer inte kan rosta och dumpningen är säker och ansvarsfullt genomförd av Sovjet. Andra kommer att säga att CH4 är ofarligt i atmosfären. En tredje grupp kommer att hävda att vi alla på jorden kommer att krama om varandra i fred på vackra gröna ängar och att det finns mat och vatten för ytterligare 100 mdr befolkning. Tro gör man i kyrkan. Hoppas kan man att fakta försvinner. Dagen blir skönare så.
****
Hello
From 1950 to 1980 the Sovjets replaced used still active old technical nuclear reactors from a huge number of electric power stations around the Empire. The decision came of 4 parameters:
1. these reactors were technically simple and extremely cheap to produce so the economical life time over lorded the physical one .
2. The Empire had large deposits of uranium raw material.
3. The Empire controlled an infinite free of charge source to chill the nuclear reactor core process against a core melt down.
4. The Empire’s policy makers knew they would not be alive the very day a problem might occur.
That resulted in a dump yard for active reactors at a dept of 4,000 m and +4 dgr C chilling water outside the island of Novaja Zemlja in the Arctic Sea. A conservative estimation is as shown a few 100 reactors at that see bed. It might be a thousand of them, however. Each of these will be active for 100,000 years depositing hundreds of degrees C 7/24. That heat must go somewhere and it softly warms up the Arctic Sea shell waters and then by currencies to be spread South via the Atlantic and Berings Oceans. 100,000 years is a long time for distribution of unwanted heat 7/24 and radiak and it’s not possible to extinguish or slow down a nuclear core running at an uncontrolled production.
The 4,000 m dept of the dump yard is the equal as the Titanic wreck far away but we know from the steel of that ship that salty waters is most corrosive to steel and the reactor No 1 at the bottom of the dump has been there since mid 50ties covered by an unknown level of other rosting reactors . It’s not IF it’s WHEN the rosting shell of No 1 turns open to salt water penetration and by extreme high pressure to flood straight into the active reactor core with its under pressure. Then it will explode and will crush the rosting reactors above to a chain reaction and cascades of radiactive steam will rise to the atmosphere for centuries. Hot water goes upwards and warms the surface at the Arctic Sea where researchers have taken the temp-tests puzzled by the unexplained cause of the warm water. The consequenses are for anybody but Risk Deniers to consider. However, the intensive heat already today might well be part of the warming up of the Arctic waters and as well as to warm up the frozen methane filled permafrost some 3,500 m above increasing the melting of the tundra to release CH4 ( methanehydrate ) more rapidly than the Green Hpuse models achieve. Furthermore, in the harbor of Murmansk a number of worn out rosting nuclear CCCP-submarines are chilled by the Arctic Sea, too. These are circumstances nobody wish to discuss until devastation is knocking on the home doors and too late. I have heard rumors that there has been a privately funded reward of $US10 mln to any daring madman going down in a Bathyscope to dig up the first reactor dump in order to inspect its rosticle level. 70 years of rosting steel around a heat producing nuclear core prevents everybody to even think of that challenge. This is a rewarding opportunity for Risk Deniers to ponder and to accept.
So when do we face an unknown number of instabile Thernobyl reactors to destroy the entire Arctic Sea for 100,000 years ? The Titanic was inspected last time some 40 years ago. It sank 2012 and the last inspection was then around 1980. She had been at the equal sea floor some 70 years likewise the reactors today for the same period of 70 years time of rosting in the equal salty waters and the wreck was closely to collapse they noticed. Anybody can make a comparison.
God Bless the small children now in their prams to an adult struggle by this heritage.
“Having the exact coordinates for the dumped container with the reactors from K-19 is undoubtedly good news,” says nuclear safety expert Andrey Zolotkov with ANO Bellona (Murmansk).
Zolotkov hopes for risk assessments to be carried out soon with the aim to see how the reactors could be lifted out of the maritime environment and brought to a yard for safe decommissioning.
“Risks of lifting the reactors can only be discussed after obtaining additional data, like seawater samples and radiation examination of the container and its technical condition,” Zolotkov says in an online conversation with the Barents Observer. He underlines that more than 50 years have passed since the dumping.
News agency RIA Novosti was first to report about the research expedition’s findings.
In the so-called “White Book” on dumped nuclear objects, originally published by President Boris Yeltsin’s environmental advisor Alexei Jablokov, the dumping of the submarine’s two reactors is listed for the Abrosimova Bay on the east coast of the Kara Sea, but exact location hasn’t been confirmed.
https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/nuclear-safety/2021/09/expedition-found-exact-location-dumped-reactor
There are a number of things we can do to combat the warming North Atlantic. We can reduce our greenhouse gas emissions by using renewable energy, improving energy efficiency and changing our consumption habits. We can also support efforts to research and develop new technologies that can help reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
By working together, we can protect the North Atlantic and its inhabitants from the effects of climate change.
People have been “fighting” climate change for many years now. Climate has always changed and it will continue to do so. There is nothing we can do about it.
I diagreee as I’m no Hot House Topping point Denier. We must fight. Read my comment at Bill | July 18, 2023 at 6:19 am | Reply
An AI comment.
I would like to see some more analysis of the potential effects of the Hunga Tonga, Hunga Hapei eruption. The amount of water vapor injected into the stratosphere was unprecedented. Some of the studies I saw early, referred to this being a live science experiment. I just wonder if this sudden crazy weather is at least partially a result of that ongoing experiment. All I have seen so far is a lot of the usual climate change hysteria.
That amount of extra water vapor in the stratosphere has to have some effect. Yes, I have seen the potential short term warming data, but is it also causing near term issues with winds, etc. I am no expert, but would hope the real experts would look at this.
Pingback: What can I do to act on climate & social change? First job is knowledge (2023 edition) - The Digital Conversationalist
Pingback: COSA STA CAUSANDO LE TEMPERATURE ESTREMAMENTE CALDE NEL NORD ATLANTICO?
Pingback: Medie- og forskerhysteri om ekstremeffekter - Klimarealistene
Pingback: Hot Summer Due to Many Factors—Carbon Dioxide Emissions Are Not One of Them • Watts Up With That? - Lead Right News
Pingback: Climate Change Weekly #479: Hot Summer Due to Many Factors—Carbon Dioxide Emissions Are Not One of Them - Climate- Science.press
Pingback: Medie- og forskerhysteri om ekstremeffekter - Klima Klimaendring Hysteri Myte Krise Klimakatastrofe Feil Fakta Fornuft Skypat Senter the Best Blogg - Nyheter CO2 Usikker Science Vitenskap Patologi
Pingback: Sommerens varme i Sør-Europa: Klima eller vær? - Derimot
Pingback: Derimot: Sommerens varme i Sør-Europa: Klima eller vær? – Antiglobalisten
Pingback: The Warmth-Delirious Media Is Wrongly Blaming Local weather Change For 2023's Warmth Waves - The Owl Report
Pingback: The Heat-Delirious Media Is Wrongly Blaming Climate Change For 2023’s Heat Waves – Menopausal Mother Nature
Pingback: The Heat-Delirious Media Is Wrongly Blaming Climate Change For 2023’s Heat Waves - maywoodtimes.com