Showing posts with label trend. Show all posts
Showing posts with label trend. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 11, 2024

Will we be alive in 2025, who will survive, 2025?


The above image, created with monthly mean global temperature anomalies by LOTI Land+Ocean NASA/GISS/GISTEMP v4 data while using a 1903-1924 base, has a trend added based on Jan 2016-Aug 2024 data. The image also shows that anomalies could be 0.99°C higher when using a more genuine pre-industrial base.

The image below featured in an earlier post and was created with an image from the NASA website while using an 1885-1915 base, illustrating the calculation behind this 0.99°C. More details are here.


The image below from Copernicus illustrates that, for more than 14 consecutive months, the temperature anomaly has been high, i.e. about 0.8°C (± 0.3°C) above the 1991-2020 average and much more when compared to a pre-industrial base, with little or no sign of a return to earlier temperatures.


The image below, from an earlier post and created with an image from the NASA website while using a 1903-1924 base, confirms that the monthly temperature anomaly through August 2024 has been more than 1.5°C above this base for each of the past consecutive 14 months. The post adds that anomalies will be even higher when compared to a pre-industrial base. The red line shows a trend produced by the NASA website (2-year Lowess Smoothing).


Potential causes for such a rapid temperature rise include a cataclysmic alignment of the temperature peak of the next El Niño coinciding with a peak in sunspots expected to occur in July 2025.

The black dashed line in the image below, adapted from NOAA, indicates a transition to La Niña in October 2024, persisting through Jan-Mar 2025.


The image below, adapted from NOAA, illustrates that El Niño conditions were present from June 2023 through April 2024, and that ENSO-neutral started in May 2024.


While El Niños typically occur every 3 to 5 years, as NOAA explains, El Niños can occur as frequently as every two years, as happened in 2002, 2004 and 2006, as the above image shows. Moving from the bottom of a La Niña to the peak of a strong El Niño could make a difference of more than 0.5°C.

The danger is that we could move into a new El Niño in 2025, while temperatures remain high due to feedbacks and while sunspots move toward a peak in this cycle, expected to occur in July 2025.

The image below (top part), adapted from NOAA, shows the observed values for the number of sunspots for cycle 25, through August 2024, as well as the values predicted by NOAA (red line).

[ from earlier post, click on images to enlarge ]

The above image (bottom part) shows the observed values for the F10.7cm radio flux for cycle 25, through August 2024, as well as the values predicted by NOAA (red line).

The observed values are much higher than predicted. If this trend continues, the rise in sunspots forcing from early 2020 to July 2025 may well make a difference of more than 0.25°C.

This - in combination with further events, developments and short-term variables - could constitute a cataclysmic alignment that could result in runaway temperature rise by 2026, as an earlier post concluded.

Natural variability is mentioned by the IPCC, but because such events vary from year to year, their impact is smoothed out in climate change calculations that average the temperature rise over the course of decades. Yet, when such events coincide in a cataclysmic alignment, as could be the case within the next few years, the extra rise in temperature from - say - the year 2021 could be over 0.75°C. Note that this is an extra rise, on top of the long-term rise due to activities by people since pre-industrial.

Furthermore, as emissions and temperatures keep rising, such an extra rise could trigger feedbacks that threaten to grow in strength and strike with ever greater ferocity, further accelerating the temperature rise while extreme weather disasters hit numerous regions around the world more frequently over larger areas, with greater intensity and for longer periods.


Such feedbacks include loss of sea ice and permafrost degradation, both terrestrial and on the seafloor of the Arctic Ocean, which looks set to cause huge releases of greenhouse gases. Temperature anomalies are high and Arctic sea ice volume is very low, as illustrated by the compilation of images below, adapted from nullschool, Climate Reanalyzer and the Danish Meteorological Institute.  


Ominously, high methane concentrations (well over 2400 ppb) were recently recorded at the observatory in Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska, as illustrated by the image below, adapted from NOAA. 


Slowing down of ocean currents could cause less heat to move deep into the ocean and more heat to instead accumulate at the surface, while more water vapor would enter the atmosphere, further speeding up the temperature rise, as discussed in earlier posts such as this one and as illustrated by the image below, created with NOAA data.
[ surface precipitable water through August 2024 ]
The compilation image below, with forecasts for September 20, 2024 03 UTC (run 00 UTC) adapted from Copernicus, illustrates gases and biomass-burning aerosols released due to forest fires burning in the Amazon. Formaldehyde and carbon monoxide cause hydroxyl depletion and thus extend methane's lifetime. 


Conflict and socio-economic stress could add further forcing. Heatwaves, fires, famine, drought, floods, crop loss, loss of habitable land and corrupt politicians threaten to cause violent conflicts to erupt around the world, industrial activity to grind to a halt and the temperature to rise above 3°C from pre-industrial, driving humans into extinction. Sadly, politicians and mainstream media fail to inform people about the danger, and once the full horror reveals itself, panic could be added to the problems the world faces.

Dangers associated with high temperatures are discussed in this earlier post. A 2018 study (by Strona & Bradshaw) indicates that most life on Earth will disappear with a 5°C rise. Humans, who depend for their survival on many other species, will likely go extinct with a 3°C rise, as illustrated by the image below, from an earlier post.


Climate Emergency Declaration

The situation is dire and the precautionary principle calls for rapid, comprehensive and effective action to reduce the damage and to improve the situation, as described in this 2022 post, where needed in combination with a Climate Emergency Declaration, as discussed at this group.



Links

• NASA - Gistemp
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp

• Pre-industrial
https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/p/pre-industrial.html

• Did the climate experience a Regime Change in 2023? 

• Water Vapor Feedback
https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2024/09/water-vapor-feedback.html

• NOAA - Monthly Temperature Anomalies Versus El Niño
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/monthly-report/global/202408/supplemental/page-4

• NOAA - El Niño and La Niña 

• Sunspots
https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/p/sunspots.html

• Cataclysmic Alignment threatens Climate Catastrophe 



Posted by at
Labels: , , , ,

Thursday, March 18, 2021

Overshoot or Omnicide?

Questions and Answers with Sam Carana


Above image shows a non-linear blue trend based on 1880-2020 NASA Land+Ocean data that are adjusted 0.78°C to reflect a pre-industrial base, to more fully reflect strong polar warming, and to reflect surface air temperatures over oceans. This blue trend highlights that the 1.5°C threshold was crossed in 2012 (inset), while the 2°C threshold looks set to be crossed next year and a 3°C rise could be reached at the end of 2026.

Overshoot?

The blue trend in the image at the top shows the temperature rise crossing 1.5°C in 2012. Could this have been a temporary overshoot? Could the trend be wrong and could temperatures come down in future, instead of continuing to rise, and could temperatures fall to such extent that this will bring the average temperature rise back to below 1.5°C?

To answer this question, let's apply the method followed by the IPCC and estimate the average temperature rise over a 30-year period that is centered around the start of 2012, i.e. from 1997 to the end of 2026. The IPPC used a 30-year period in its Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 ºC, while assuming that, for future years, the current multi-decadal warming trend would continue (see image below).


As said, the image at the top shows the temperature rise crossing 1.5°C in 2012. For the average temperature over the 30-year period 1997-2026 to be below 1.5°C, temperatures would have to fall over the next few years. Even if the temperature for 2021 fell to a level as low as it was in 2018 and remained at that same lower level until end 2026, the 1997-2026 average would still be more than 1.5°C above pre-industrial. Furthermore, for temperatures to fall over the next few years, there would need to be a fall in concentrations of greenhouse gases over the next few years, among other things. Instead, greenhouse gas levels appear to be rising steadily, if not at accelerating pace.

What did the IPCC envisage? As the image below shows, the IPCC in AR5 did envisage carbon dioxide under RCP 2.6 to be 421 ppm in 2100, while the combined CO₂e for carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide would be 475 ppm in 2100.


The image below, based on a study by Detlef van Vuuren et al. (2011), pictures pathways for concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, for each of four Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs).


Above image shows that, for RCP 2.6 to apply in the above study, there is little or no room for a rise in these greenhouse gases. In fact, the study shows that methane levels would have to be falling dramatically. At the moment, however, methane concentrations show no signs of falling and instead appear to be following if not exceeding RCP 8.5, as discussed in a recent post and as also illustrated by the images below. The IPCC used similar figures in AR5 (2013), as shown below. 


Greenhouse gas levels are rising

As the image below shows, the carbon dioxide (CO₂) level recorded at Mauna Loa, Hawaii, was 421.36 parts per million (ppm) on April 8, 2021. 


The N20 satellite recorded a methane peak of 2862 ppb on the afterrnoon of March 29, 2021, at 487.2 mb, as the image below shows.


A similarly high methane peak was recorded by the MetOp-1 satellite at 469 mb on the morning of April 4, 2021. 

Below are the highest daily mean methane levels recorded by the MetOp-1 satellite at selected altitudes on March 10 or 12, for the years 2013-2021, showing that methane levels are rising, especially at the higher altitude associated with 293 mb. 


Similarly, nitrous oxide levels show no signs of falling, as illustrated by the image below.


Methane grew 15.85 ppb in 2020, how fast could CO₂e rise? 

Rising greenhouse gas levels and associated feedbacks threaten to cause temperatures to keep rising, in a runaway scenario that cannot be reverted even if emissions by people were cut to zero.

Peaks in greenhouse gas levels could suffice to trigger the clouds feedback, which occurs when a CO₂e threshold of around 1,200 ppm is crossed, and the stratocumulus decks abruptly become unstable and break up into scattered cumulus clouds.

Once the clouds tipping point is crossed, it will be impossible to undo its impact, in line with the nature of a tipping point. In theory, CO₂ levels could come down after the stratocumulus breakup, but the stratocumulus decks would only reform once the CO₂ levels drop below 300 ppm.

A recent post repeated the warning that by 2026, there could be an 18°C rise when including the clouds feedback, while humans will likely go extinct with a 3°C rise and most life on Earth will disappear with a 5°C rise. In conclusion, once the clouds feedback gets triggered, it cannot be reverted by people, because by the time the clouds feedback starts kicking in, people would already have disappeared, so there won't be any people around to keep trying to revert it.

[ click on images to enlarge ]
Methane levels are rising rapidly. The image to the right shows a trend that is based on NOAA 2006-2020 annual global mean methane data and that points at a mean of 3893 ppb getting crossed by the end of 2026. 

Why is that value of 3893 ppb important? On April 8, 2021, carbon dioxide reached a peak of 421.36 ppm, i.e. 778.64 ppm away from the clouds tipping point at 1200 ppm, and 778.64 ppm CO₂e translates into 3893 ppb of methane at a 1-year GWP of 200. 

In other words, a methane mean of 3893 ppb alone could cause the clouds tipping point to get crossed, resulting in an abrupt 8°C temperature rise. 

Such a high mean by 2026 cannot be ruled out, given the rapid recent growth in mean annual methane levels (15.85 ppb in 2020, see inset on image). 

Additionally, there are further warming elements than just carbon dioxide and methane, e.g. nitrous oxide and water vapor haven't yet been included in the CO₂e total.

Moreover, it may not even be necessary for the global mean methane level to reach 3893 ppb. A high methane peak in one single spot may suffice and a peak of 3893 ppb of methane could be reached soon, given that methane just reached a peak of 2862 ppb, while even higher peaks were reached over the past few years, including a peak of 3369 ppb recorded on the afternoon of August 31, 2018. 

Abrupt stratocumulus cloud shattering 

[ click on images to enlarge ]
Catastrophic crack propagation is what makes a balloon pop. Could low-lying clouds similarly break up and vanish abruptly?

Could peak greenhouse gas concentrations in one spot break up droplets into water vapor, thus raising CO₂e and propagating break-up of more droplets, etc., to shatter entire clouds?

In other words, an extra burst of methane from the seafoor of the Arctic Ocean alone could suffice to trigger the clouds tipping point and abruptly push temperatures up by an additional 8°C.

Omnicide?

This brings the IPCC views and suggestions into question. As discussed above, for the average temperature to come down to below 1.5°C over the period 1997-2026, temperatures would need to fall over the next few years. What again would it take for temperatures to fall over the next few years?

Imagine that all emissions of greenhouse gases by people would end. Even if all emissions of greenhouse gases by people could magically end right now, there would still be little or no prospect for temperatures to fall over the next few years. Reasons for this are listed below, and it is not an exhaustive list since some things are hard to assess, such as whether oceans will be able to keep absorbing as much heat and carbon dioxide as they currently do.

By implication, there is no carbon budget left. Suggesting that there was a carbon budget left, to be divided among polluters and to be consumed over the next few years, that suggestion is irresponsible. Below are some reasons why the temperature is likely to rise over the next few years, rather than fall.

How likely is a rise of more than 3°C by 2026?

• The warming impact of carbon dioxide reaches its peak a decade after emission, while methane's impact over ten years is huge, so the warming impact of the greenhouse gases already in the atmosphere is likely to prevent temperatures from falling and could instead keep raising temperatures for some time to come.

• Temperatures are currently suppressed. We're in a La Niña period, as illustrated by the image below.


[ click on images to enlarge ]
As NASA describes, El Niño events occur roughly every two to seven years. As temperatures keep rising, ever more frequent strong El Niño events are likely to occur. NOAA anticipates La Niña to re-emerge during the fall or winter 2021/2022, so it's likely that a strong El Niño will occur between 2023 and 2025. 

• Rising temperatures can cause growth in sources of greenhouse gases and a decrease in sinks. The image below shows how El Niño/La Niña events and growth in CO₂ levels line up. 


• We're also at a low point in the sunspot cycle. As the image on the right shows, the number of sunspots can be expected to rise as we head toward 2026, and temperatures can be expected to rise accordingly. According to James Hansen et al., the variation of solar irradiance from solar minimum to solar maximum is of the order of 0.25 W/m⁻².

• Add to this the impact of a recent Sudden Stratospheric Warming event. We are currently experiencing the combined impact of three short-term variables that are suppressing the temperature rise, i.e. a Sudden Stratospheric Warming event, a La Niña event and a low in sunspots.

Over the next few years, in the absence of large volcano eruptions and in the absence of Sudden Stratospheric Warming events, a huge amount of heat could build up at surface level. As the temperature impact of the other two short-term variables reverses, i.e. as the sunspot cycle moves toward a peak and a El Niño develops, this could push up temperatures substantially. The world could be set up for a perfect storm by 2026, since sunspots are expected to reach a peak by then and since it takes a few years to move from a La Niña low to the peak of an El Niño period.

• Furthermore, temperatures are currently also suppressed by sulfate cooling. This impact is falling away as we progress with the necessary transition away from fossil fuel and biofuel, toward the use of more wind turbines and solar panels instead. Aerosols typically fall out of the atmosphere within a few weeks, so as the transition progresses, this will cause temperatures to rise over the next few years. Most sulfates are caused by large-scale industrial activity, such as coal-fired power plants and smelters. A significant part of sulphur emissions is also caused by volcanoes. Historically, some 20 volcanoes are actively erupting on any particular day. Of the 49 volcanoes that erupted during 2021, 45 volcanoes were still active with continuing (for at least 3 months) eruptions as at March 12, 2021.

• Also holding back the temperature rise at the moment is the buffer effect of thick sea ice in the Arctic that consumes heat as it melts. As Arctic sea ice thickness declines, more heat will instead warm up the Arctic, resulting in albedo changes, changes to the Jet Stream and possibly trigger huge releases of methane from the seafloor. The rise in ocean temperature on the Northern Hemisphere looks very threatening in this regard (see image on the right) and many of these developments are discussed at the extinction page. There are numerous further feedbacks that look set to start kicking in with growing ferocity as temperatures keep rising, such as releases of greenhouse gases resulting from permafrost thawing and the decline of the snow and ice cover. Some 30 feedbacks affecting the Arctic are discussed at the feedbacks page.

• The conclusion of study after study is that the situation is worse than expected and will get even worse as warming continues. Some examples: a recent study found that the Amazon rainforest is no longer a sink, but has become a source, contributing to warming the planet instead; another study found that soil bacteria release CO₂ that was previously thought to remain trapped by iron; another study found that forest soil carbon does not increase with higher CO₂ levels; another study found that forests' long-term capacity to store carbon is dropping in regions with extreme annual fires; a recent post discussed a study finding that at higher temperatures, respiration rates continue to rise in contrast to sharply declining rates of photosynthesis, which under business-as-usual emissions would nearly halve the land sink strength by as early as 2040; the post also mentions a study on oceans that finds that, with increased stratification, heat from climate warming less effectively penetrates into the deep ocean, which contributes to further surface warming, while it also reduces the capability of the ocean to store carbon, exacerbating global surface warming; finally, a recent study found that kelp off the Californian coast has collapsed. So, both land and ocean sinks look set to decrease as temperatures keep rising, while a 2020 study points out that the ocean sink will also immediately slow down as future fossil fuel emission cuts drive reduced growth of atmospheric CO₂. 

Where do we go from here?

[ image from earlier post ]
The same blue trend that's in the image at the top also shows up in the image on the right, from an earlier post, together with a purple trend and a red trend that picture even worse scenarios than the blue trend.

The purple trend is based on 15 recent years (2006-2020), so it can cover a 30-year period (2006-2035) that is centered around end December 2020. As the image shows, the purple trend points at a rise of 10°C by 2026, leaving little or no scope for the current acceleration to slow, let alone for the anomaly to return to below 2°C.

The red trend is based on a dozen recent years (2009-2020) and shows that the 2°C threshold could already have been crossed in 2020, while pointing at a rise of 18°C by 2025.

In conclusion, temperatures could rise by more than 3°C by the end of 2026, as indicated by the blue trend in the image at the top. At that point, humans will likely go extinct, making it in many respects rather futile to speculate about what will happen beyond 2026. On the other hand, the right thing to do is to help avoid the worst things from happening, through comprehensive and effective action as described in the Climate Plan.


Links

• Climate Plan

• NOAA Global Climate Report - February 2021 - Monthly Temperature Anomalies Versus El Niño

• NOAA Northern Hemisphere Ocean Temperature Anomaly

• NOAA Sunspots - solar cycle progression

• Smithsonian Institution - Volcanoes - current eruptions

• IPCC Special Report Global Warming of 1.5 ºC - Summary for Policy Makers

• IPCC AR5 WG1 Summary for Policymakers - Box SPM.1: Representative Concentration Pathways

• IPCC AR5, Climate Change (2013), Chapter 8

• The representative concentration pathways: an overview - by Detlef van Vuuren et al. (2011)

• Young people's burden: requirement of negative CO₂ emissions - by James Hansen et al. (2017)

• 2020: Hottest Year On Record

• What Carbon Budget?

• Most Important Message Ever

• High Temperatures October 2020

• Temperature keep rising

• More Extreme Weather

• Extinction

• Feedbacks

• Sudden Stratospheric Warming

• Possible climate transitions from breakup of stratocumulus decks under greenhouse warming - by Tapio Schneider  et al.

• Iron mineral dissolution releases iron and associated organic carbon during permafrost thaw - by Monique Patzner et al.

• Global maps of twenty-first century forest carbon fluxes - by Nancy Harris et al.

• A trade-off between plant and soil carbon storage under elevated CO2 - by César Terrer et al.

• Forests' long-term capacity to store carbon is dropping in regions with extreme annual fires

• Decadal changes in fire frequencies shift tree communities and functional traits - by Adam Pellegrini et al.

• NOAA - Annual Mean Growth Rate for Mauna Loa, Hawaii

• NOAA - Trends in Atmospheric Methane
https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends_ch4

• The Climate Data Guide: Nino SST Indices - by Kevin Trenberth & NCAR Staff (Eds)
https://climatedataguide.ucar.edu/climate-data/nino-sst-indices-nino-12-3-34-4-oni-and-tni

• Historical change of El Niño properties sheds light on future changes of extreme El Niño - by Bin Wang et al. 

• NOAA - ENSO: Recent Evolution, Current Status and Predictions, April 12, 2021
https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/lanina/enso_evolution-status-fcsts-web.pdf

• Upper Ocean Temperatures Hit Record High in 2020 - by Lijing Cheng et al.

• Large-scale shift in the structure of a kelp forest ecosystem co-occurs with an epizootic and marine heatwave - by Meredith McPherson et al.

• External Forcing Explains Recent Decadal Variability of the Ocean Carbon Sink - by Galen McKinley et al. (2020) 
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2019AV000149

• Maximum warming occurs about one decade after a carbon dioxide emission - by Katharine Ricke et al.

• Blue Ocean Event

• Confirm Methane's Importance

• FAQs

Posted by at
Labels: , , , , ,

Friday, January 15, 2021

2020: Hottest Year On Record

NASA data show that 2020 was the hottest year on record.



The image below shows that high temperature in 2020 hit Siberia and the Arctic Ocean.

In above images, the temperature anomaly is compared to 1951-1980, NASA's default baseline. When using an earlier baseline, the data need to be adjusted. The image below shows a trendline pointing at an 0.31°C adjustment for a 1900 baseline. 



Additional adjustment is needed when using a 1750 baseline, while it also makes sense to add further adjustment for higher polar anomalies and for air temperatures over oceans, rather than sea surface water temperatures. In total, a 0.78°C adjustment seems appropriate, as has been applied before, such as in this analysis. For the year 2020, this translates in a temperature rise of 1.8029°C versus the year 1750.

Three trends: blue, purple and red

Will the global temperature rise to 3°C above 1750 by 2026? The blue trend below is based on 1880-2020 NASA Land+Ocean data and adjusted by 0.78°C to reflect a 1750 baseline, ocean air temperatures and higher polar anomalies, and it crosses a 3°C rise in 2026.



The trend shows a temperature for 2020 that is slightly higher than indicated by the data. This is in line with the fact that we're currently in a La Niña period and that we're also at a low point in the sunspot cycle, as discussed in an earlier post. The blue trend also shows that the 1.5°C treshold was already crossed even before the Paris Agreement was accepted. 



The second (purple) trend is based on a shorter period, i.e. 2006-2020 NASA land+ocean (LOTI) data, again adjusted by 0.78°C to reflect a 1750 baseline, ocean air temperatures and higher polar anomalies. The trend approaches 10°C above 1750 by 2026. The trend is based on 15 years of data, making it span a 30-year period centered around end 2020 when extended into the future for a similar 15 year period. The trend approaches 10°C above 1750 in 2026.

The trend is displayed on the backdrop of an image from an earlier post, showing how a 10°C rise could eventuate by 2026 when adding up the impact of warming elements and their interaction.



The stacked bars are somewhat higher than the trend. Keep in mind that the stacked bars are for the month February, when anomalies can be significantly higher than the annual average.

Temperature rise for February 2016 versus 1900.
In the NASA image on the right, the February 2016 temperature was 1.70°C above 1900 (i.e. 1885-1914). In the stacked-bar analysis, the February 2016 rise from 1900 was conservately given a value of 1.62°C, which was extended into the future, while an additional 0.3°C was added for temperature rise from pre-industrial to 1900.

Later analyses such as this one also added a further 0.2°C to the temperature rise, to reflect ocean air temperatures (rather than water temperatures) and higher polar anomalies (note the grey areas on the image in the right).

Anyway, the image shows two types of analysis on top of each other, one analysis based on trend analysis and another analysis based on a model using high values for the various warming elements. The stacked-bar analysis actually doesn't reflect the worst-case scenario, an even faster rise is illustrated by the next trend, the red line.

The third (red) trend suggests that we may have crossed the 2°C treshold in the year 2020. The trend is based on a recent period (2009-2020) of the NASA land+ocean data, again adjusted by 0.78°C to reflect a 1750 baseline, ocean air temperatures and higher polar anomalies.




Where do we go from here? 

It's important to acknowledge the danger of acceleration of the temperature rise over the next few years. The threat is illustrated by the image below and shows up most prominently in the red trend. 


Of the three trends, the red trend is based on the shortest period, and it does indicate that we have aready crossed the 2°C treshold and we could be facing an even steeper temperature rise over the next few years.

We're in a La Niña period and we're also at a low point in the sunspot cycle. This suppresses the temperature somewhat, so the 2020 temperature should actually be adjusted upward to compensate for such variables. Importantly, while such variables do show up more when basing trends on shorter periods, the data have not be adjusted for this in this case, so the situation could actually be even worse. 

At a 3°C rise, humans will likely go extinct, while most life on Earth will disappear with a 5°C rise, and as the temperature keeps rising, oceans will evaporate and Earth will go the same way as Venus, a 2019 analysis warned. 

Dangerous acceleration of the temperature rise 

There are many potential causes behind the acceleration of the temperature rise, such as the fact that the strongest impact of carbon dioxide is felt ten years after emission, so we are yet to experience the full wrath of the carbon dioxide emitted over the past decade. However, this doesn't explain why 2020 turned out to be the hottest year on record, as opposed to - say - 2019, given that in 2020 carbon dioxide emissions were 7% lower than in 2019.

James Hansen confirms that the temperature rise is accelerating, and he points at aerosols as the cause. However, most cooling aerosols come from industries such as smelters and coal-fired power plants that have hardly reduced their operations in 2020, as illustrated by the image below, from the aerosols page. 


Above image shows that on December 17, 2020, at 10:00 UTC, sulfate aerosols (SO₄) were as high as 6.396 τ at the green circle. Wind on the image is measured at 850 hPa.

Could the land sink be decreasing? A recent study shows that the mean temperature of the warmest quarter (3-month period) passed the thermal maximum for photosynthesis during the past decade. At higher temperatures, respiration rates continue to rise in contrast to sharply declining rates of photosynthesis. Under business-as-usual emissions, this divergence elicits a near halving of the land sink strength by as early as 2040. While this is a frightening prospect, it still doesn't explain why 2020 turned out to be the hottest year on record. 

Oceans are taking up less heat, thus leaving more heat in the atmosphere. The danger is illustrated by the image below. 


The white band around -60° (South) indicates that the Southern Ocean has not yet caught up with global warming, featuring low-level clouds that reflect sunlight back into space. Over time, the low clouds will decrease, which will allow more sunlight to be absorbed by Earth and give the world additional warming. A recent study finds that, after this 'pattern effect' is accounted for, committed global warming at present-day forcing rises by 0.7°C. While this is very worrying, it still doesn't explain why 2020 turned out to be the hottest year on record. 

Ocean stratification contributes to further surface warming, concludes another recent study: 
"The stronger ocean warming within upper layers versus deep water has caused an increase of ocean stratification in the past half century. With increased stratification, heat from climate warming less effectively penetrates into the deep ocean, which contributes to further surface warming. It also reduces the capability of the ocean to store carbon, exacerbating global surface warming. Furthermore, climate warming prevents the vertical exchanges of nutrients and oxygen, thus impacting the food supply of whole marine ecosystems."
"By uptaking ~90% of anthropogenic heat and ~30% of the carbon emissions, the ocean buffers global warming. [The] ocean has already absorbed an immense amount of heat, and will continue to absorb excess energy in the Earth’s system until atmospheric carbon levels are significantly lowered. In other words, the excess heat already in the ocean, and heat likely to enter the ocean in the coming years, will continue to affect weather patterns, sea level, and ocean biota for some time, even under zero carbon emission conditions."
Many feedbacks are starting to kick in with greater ferocity, with tipping points threatening to get crossed or already crossed, such as the latent heat tipping point, i.e. loss of the ocean heat buffer, as Arctic sea ice keeps getting thinner. As the above map also shows, the temperature rise is hitting the Arctic Ocean particularly hard. At least ten tipping points are affecting the Arctic, including the latent heat tipping point and the methane hydrates tipping point, as illustrated by the image below.
 
[ from an earlier post ]

A combination of higher temperatures and the resulting feedbacks such as stronger ocean stratification, stronger wind, decline of Arctic snow and ice and a distorted Jet Stream is threatening to cause formation of a lid at the surface of the North Atlantic Ocean that enables more heat to move to the Arctic Ocean. This could cause huge amounts of methane to erupt from the seafloor, thus contributing to cause the 1,200 ppm CO₂e cloud tipping point to get crossed, resulting in an extra 8°C rise, as an earlier post and a recent post warned.

Dangerous acceleration of the temperature rise

The danger is that methane is erupting in the Arctic from the seafloor and that this increasingly contributes to methane reaching the stratosphere. 

While methane initially is very potent in heating up the atmosphere, it is generally broken down relatively quickly, but in the atmosphere over the Arctic, there is very little hydroxyl to break down the methane. 

Methane also persists much longer in the stratosphere, which contributes to its accumulation there. 


Large amounts of methane may already be erupting from the seafloor of the Arctic Ocean, rising rapidly and even reaching the stratosphere. 

This danger is getting little public attention. The NOAA image on the right shows the globally-averaged, monthly mean atmospheric methane abundance derived from measurements from marine surface sites. Measurements that are taken at sea level do not reflect methane very well that is rising up from the seafloor of the Arctic Ocean, especially where the methane rises up high in plumes. 

Satellite measurements better reflect the danger. The image on the right shows that the MetOp-1 satellite recorded peak methane levels as high as 2715 ppb at 469 mb on the morning of January 6, 2021. 

Most of the high (magenta-colored) levels of methane are located over oceans and a lot of them over the Arctic Ocean. 

The next image on the right shows the situation closer to sea level, at 586 mb, where even less of the high levels of methane show up over land, indicating that the methane originated from the seafloor. 

The third image on the righ shows the situation even closer to sea level, at 742 mb, and almost all high levels of methane show up over the Arctic Ocean and over areas where the Atlantic Ocean and the Pacific Ocean border on the Arctic. 

Because methane is lighter than air and much lighter than water, methane erupting from the seafloor will quickly rise up vertically. While much of the methane that is released from the seabed can get broken down in the water by microbes, methane that is rising rapidly and highly concentrated in the form of plumes will leave little opportunity for microbes to break it down in the water column, especially where waters are shallow,
as is the case in much of the Arctic Ocean.

As methane hydrates destabilize, methane will erupt with an explosive force, since methane is highly compressed inside the hydrate (1 m³ of methane hydrate can release 160 m³ of gas). Such eruptions can destabilize further hydrates located nearby. Because of this explosive force, plumes of methane can rise at high speed through the water column. 

Because methane is so much lighter than water, large methane releases from the seafloor will form larger bubbles that merge and stick together, developing more thrust as they rise through the water.

Because of this thrust, methane plumes will keep rising rapidly after entering the atmosphere, and the plumes will more easily push away aerosols and gases that slow down the rise in the air of methane elsewhere, such as where methane is emitted by cows. 

A further image of another satellite is added on the right. The N2O satellite recorded methane levels as high as 2817 ppb at 487 mb on the morning of January 10, 2021. 

Such sudden and very high peaks can hardly be caused by agriculture or wetlands, but instead they are likely caused by destabilization of methane hydrates in sediments at the seafloor. 

Further contributing to the danger is the fact that little hydroxyl is present in the atmosphere over the Arctic, so it is much harder for this methane to get broken down in the air over the Arctic, compared to methane emissions elsewhere. 

Finally, the edge of the stratosphere is much lower over the Arctic, as discussed in an earlier post.

All this makes that methane that is erupting from the seafloor of the Arctic Ocean is more prone to accumulate in the stratosphere. Once methane is in the stratosphere, it's unlikely that it will come back into the troposphere.

The IPCC AR5 (2013) gave methane a lifetime of 12.4 years. The IPCC TAR (2001) gave stratospheric methane a lifetime of 120 years, adding that less than 7% of methane did reach the stratosphere at the time. According to IPCC AR5, of the methane that gets broken down by hydroxyl in the atmosphere, some 8.5% got broken down in the stratosphere.

Conclusions

The situation is dire and calls for immediate, comprehensive and effective action as described in the Climate Plan.

In the video below, Paul Beckwith discusses the situation: 


For another perspective, Guy McPherson discusses the situation in the video below, Edge of Extinction: Maybe I’m Wrong. 





Links

• Climate Plan
https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/p/climateplan.html

• NASA Global Land-Ocean Temperature Index
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp

• What are El Niño and La Niña?
https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/ninonina.html

• Multivariate El Niño/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) Index Version 2 (MEI.v2)
https://psl.noaa.gov/enso/mei 
 
• Temperatures keep rising
https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2020/12/temperatures-keep-rising.html

• There is no time to lose
https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2020/11/there-is-no-time-to-lose.html

• Possible climate transitions from breakup of stratocumulus decks under greenhouse warming, by Tapio Schneider et al. (2019)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-019-0310-1

• A rise of 18°C or 32.4°F by 2026?

• Greater committed warming after accounting for the pattern effect - by Chen Zhou et al. 

• Upper Ocean Temperatures Hit Record High in 2020 - by Lijing Cheng et al. 
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00376-021-0447-x

• How close are we to the temperature tipping point of the terrestrial biosphere? - by Katharyn Duffy et al.
https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/7/3/eaay1052

• Methane hydrates tipping point threatens to get crossed

• Temperatures threaten to become unbearable

• Cold freshwater lid on North Atlantic

• Aerosols

• NOAA - Trends in Atmospheric Methane
https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends_ch4

•  COVID-19 lockdown causes unprecedented drop in global CO2 emissions in 2020 - Gobal Carbon Project
https://www.globalcarbonproject.org/carbonbudget/20/files/International_FutureEarth_GCB2020.pdf

• Global Average Temperatures in 2020 Reached a RECORD HIGH of 1.55 C above PreIndustrial in 1750 - by Paul Beckwith 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0lgTAEUYyA

• Edge of Extinction: Maybe I’m Wrong - by Guy McPherson
https://guymcpherson.com/2021/01/edge-of-extinction-maybe-im-wrong

• Extinction
https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/p/extinction.html

Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)