Archive for the ‘oceans – oceanic cycles’ Category

CO2 rise "most likely due to warming oceans degassing"


“What happens if we use the plant stomata-derived CO2 instead of the ice core data?

We find that the ~250-year lag time is consistent. CO2 levels peaked 250 years after the Medieval Warm Period peaked and the Little Ice Age cooling began and CO2 bottomed out 240 years after the trough of the Little Ice Age. In a fashion similar to the glacial/interglacial lags in the ice cores, the plant stomata data indicate that CO2 has lagged behind temperature changes by about 250 years over the last millennium. The rise in CO2 that began in 1860 is most likely the result of warming oceans degassing.”  “CO2: Ice Cores vs. Plant Stomata

Now EPA using Clean Water Act to regulate CO2


“SEATTLE – States with coastal water that is becoming more acidic because of carbon dioxide should list them as impaired under the Clean Water Act, the U.S. Environmental Agency said.

The federal agency’s memo Monday to states recognizes carbon dioxide as not only an air pollutant but a water pollutant, and notes the serious impacts that ocean acification  [sic] can have on aquatic life.  …

“Ocean acidification is one of the biggest threats to our marine environment,” said Miyoko Sakashita, a senior attorney at Center for Biological Diversity. This EPA action “really gave the green light to using the Clean Water Act to address ocean acidification,” she said.

The EPA’s memo stems from a legal settlement with the Center for Biological Diversity, which sued the EPA last year for not requiring Washington state to list its coastal waters as impaired by rising acidity.

The memo said in 2012, states should begin to list bodies of water that suffer from ocean acidification as impaired, but it also acknowledged there’s currently not enough information in many states to support listings for that reason.  …

Sandy Howard, a spokeswoman with the Washington Department of Ecology … said the listing program, however, is not the correct tool to fix the problem of greenhouse gas emissions.

The program focuses on local water quality fixes, she said, while the issue of greenhouse gas emissions is a global one.”  “EPA tells states to consider rising ocean acidity

How bad is the Gulf spill?


“The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is bad — no one would dispute it. But just how bad?  …

[T]he Deepwater Horizon blowout is not unprecedented, nor is it yet among the worst oil accidents in history. And its ultimate impact will depend on a long list of interlinked variables, including the weather, ocean currents, the properties of the oil involved and the success or failure of the frantic efforts to stanch the flow and remediate its effects.  …

The ruptured well, currently pouring an estimated 210,000 gallons of oil a day into the gulf, could flow for years and still not begin to approach the 36 billion gallons of oil spilled by retreating Iraqi forces when they left Kuwait in 1991. It is not yet close to the magnitude of the Ixtoc I blowout in the Bay of Campeche in Mexico in 1979, which spilled an estimated 140 million gallons of crude before the gusher could be stopped.

And it will have to get much worse before it approaches the impact of the Exxon Valdez accident of 1989, which contaminated 1,300 miles of largely untouched shoreline and killed tens of thousands of seabirds, otters and seals along with 250 eagles and 22 killer whales.  …

Engineers said the type of oil pouring out is lighter than the heavy crude spilled by the Exxon Valdez, evaporates more quickly and is easier to burn. It also appears to respond to the use of dispersants, which break up globs of oil and help them sink.  …

The winds are dying down and the seas are calming, allowing for renewed skimming operations and possible new controlled burns of oil on the surface. BP technicians are trying to inject dispersants deep below the surface, which could reduce the impact on aquatic life. Winds and currents could move the globs of emulsified oil away from coastal shellfish breeding grounds.  …

Thousands of gallons of oil flow into the gulf from natural undersea well seeps every day, engineers say …

After the Ixtoc spill 31 years ago, the second-largest oil release in history, the gulf rebounded. Within three years, there was little visible trace of the spill off the Mexican coast …”  “Gulf oil spill is bad, but how bad?

Ocean oil spills from natural seeps dwarf spills from oil wells and tankers


Stephen Wilde's new climate model


“In my articles to date I have been unwilling to claim anything as grand as the creation of a new model of climate because until now I was unable to propose any solar mechanism that could result directly in global albedo changes without some other forcing agent or that could account for a direct solar cause of discontinuities in the temperature profile along the horizontal line of the oceanic thermohaline circulation.  I have now realised that the global albedo changes necessary and the changes in solar energy input to the oceans can be explained by the latitudinal shifts (beyond normal seasonal variation) of all the air circulation systems and in particular the net latitudinal positions of the three main cloud bands namely the two generated by the mid latitude jet streams plus the Inter Tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ).

The secret lies in the declining angle of incidence of solar energy input from equator to poles.

It is apparent that the same size and density of cloud mass moved, say, 1000 miles nearer to the equator will have the following effects:

i) It will receive more intense irradiation from the sun and so will reflect more energy to space.

ii) It will reduce the amount of energy reaching the surface compared to what it would have let in if situated more poleward.

iii) In the northern hemisphere due to the current land/sea distribution the more equatorward the cloud moves the more ocean surface it will cover thus reducing total solar input to the oceans and reducing the rate of accretion to ocean energy content.

iv) It will produce cooling rains over a larger area of ocean surface.

As a rule the ITCZ is usually situated north of the equator because most ocean is in the southern hemisphere and it is ocean temperatures that dictate it’s position by governing the rate of energy transfer from oceans to air. Thus if the two mid latitude jets move equatorward at the same time as the ITCZ moves closer to the equator the combined effect on global albedo and the amount of solar energy able to penetrate the oceans will be substantial and would dwarf the other proposed effects on albedo from changes in cosmic ray intensity generating changes in cloud totals as per Svensmark and from suggested changes caused in upper cloud quantities by changes in atmospheric chemistry involving ozone which various other climate sceptics propose.

Thus the following NCM will incorporate my above described positional cause of changes in albedo and rates of energy input to the oceans rather than any of the other proposals. That then leads to a rather neat solution to the other theories’ problems with the timing of the various cycles as becomes clear below.”

Read more here:  “A new and effective climate model

AGW climate models blow another prediction


“New NASA measurements of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, part of the global ocean conveyor belt that helps regulate climate around the North Atlantic, show no significant slowing over the past 15 years. The data suggest the circulation may have even sped up slightly in the recent past.

The findings are the result of a new monitoring technique, developed by oceanographer Josh Willis of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., using measurements from ocean-observing satellites and profiling floats. The findings are reported in the March 25 issue of Geophysical Research Letters.

The Atlantic overturning circulation is a system of currents, including the Gulf Stream, that bring warm surface waters from the tropics northward into the North Atlantic. There, in the seas surrounding Greenland, the water cools, sinks to great depths and changes direction. What was once warm surface water heading north turns into cold deep water going south. This overturning is one part of the vast conveyor belt of ocean currents that move heat around the globe.  …

Willis found evidence that the circulation had sped up about 20 percent from 1993 to 2009. This is the longest direct record of variability in the Atlantic overturning to date and the only one at high latitudes.

The latest climate models predict the overturning circulation will slow down as greenhouse gases warm the planet and melting ice adds freshwater to the ocean.”  “NASA Study Finds Atlantic ‘Conveyor Belt’ Not Slowing

Diversity of corals in "too warm" Indian Ocean surprises alarmists


“Penn State researchers and their international collaborators have discovered a diversity of corals harboring unusual species of symbiotic algae in the warm waters of the Andaman Sea in the northeastern Indian Ocean. “The existence of so many novel coral symbioses thriving in a place that is too warm for most corals gives us hope that coral reefs and the ecosystems they support may persist — at least in some places — in the face of global warming,” said the team’s leader, Penn State Assistant Professor of Biology Todd LaJeunesse.  …

“The fact that the Andaman Sea and other regions around Southeast Asia are home to such a high diversity of corals is surprising [to AGW alarmists] because the water there is so warm and sometimes murky,” said LaJeunesse. “The inshore locations we surveyed are not the sort of places where [AGW alarmists] would expect to see thriving coral communities. Not only is the water warm and murky, but the tidal flux is so great that many of the corals can spend hours out of water, exposed to the harsh sun and dry air.”  …

LaJeunesse said that one of the team’s most important findings is that coral-algal symbioses are much more ecologically and evolutionarily responsive to environmental changes than previously was believed.”  “Diversity of Corals, Algae in Warm Indian Ocean Suggests Resilience to Future Global Warming

Add it to the list: AGW causes bigger waves


“A major increase in maximum ocean wave heights off the Pacific Northwest in recent decades has forced scientists to re-evaluate how high a “100-year event” might be, and the new findings raise special concerns for flooding, coastal erosion and structural damage.  …

In a study just published online in the journal Coastal Engineering, scientists from Oregon State University and the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries report that the cause of these dramatically higher waves is not completely certain, but “likely due to Earth’s changing climate.”  …

“Possible causes might be changes in storm tracks, higher winds, more intense winter storms, or other factors,” Ruggiero said. “These probably are related to global warming” …

This research was supported by the Sectoral Application Research Program, a part of the Climate Program Office at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.”  “Maximum Height of Extreme Waves Up Dramatically in Pacific Northwest

Will "ocean acidification" destroy calcareous creatures, as claimed by alarmists?


“The authors write that “coccolithophores are unicellular pelagic algae that represent a large part of the world ocean’s nannophytoplankton and play a significant role in the carbon cycle as major producers of biogenic calcium carbonate,” stating that “the inorganic fossil remains of coccolithophores consist of <20µm calcareous plates called coccoliths,” the small size and large abundance of which “make it possible to sample marine sediment cores at mm to sub-mm intervals with ultra-high resolution.”  …

The three researchers report that “morphometric parameters measured on E. Huxleyi, G. muellerae and G. oceanica indicate increasing coccolithophore shell carbonate mass from ~1917 until 2004 concomitant with rising pCO2 and sea surface temperature in the region of the SBB.” More specifically, they say that “a >33% increase in mean coccolith weight was determined for the order Isochrysidales over 87 years from ~1917 until 2004.”

Grelaud et al. write that “the last century has witnessed an increasing net influx of atmospheric carbon dioxide into the world’s oceans, a rising of pCO2 of surface waters, and under-saturation with respect to aragonite, especially along the North American Pacific margin,” which was the site of their study. These conditions, as they describe it, have been predicted by climate alarmists “to result in reduced coccolithophore carbonate mass and a concomitant decrease in size and weight of coccoliths [italics added].” As indicated by Grelaud et al.’s study, however, just the opposite appears to be the case in the real world, even in places where the predicted calcification reductions are expected to be greatest, as has also been demonstrated to be the case by the work of Iglesias-Rodriguez et al. (2008), who observed — in the words of Grelaud et al. — “a 40% increase in average coccolith weight across the last 220 years, as recorded in a box core from the subpoloar North Atlantic,” and as has been further confirmed by the complimentary work of Halloran et al. (2008).”  “Calcifying Coccolithophores off the California Coast

Plan B: the ocean acidification scare


“We all know how hard it is to say “sorry” when we’ve got something seriously wrong. Much easier, instead, to come up with a formula which says that even though some fools might perceive us to have been in error we were in fact right all along. This is why, just as they did once before when they stopped talking about “global warming” and started talking about “climate change” , climate-fear-promoters like [Charles] Clover are starting to big up this deadly new threat called “acidification of the oceans.”

This is no more a genuine threat than is AGW as you’ll learn if you read here, here, here, [here,] or this article at Watts Up With That. But it has the huge advantage, from the climate-fear-promotion industry’s point of view, that it continues to finger CO2 as the real villain of the piece. And so long as they can do that, it means our governments will still have the excuse they need to continue with their insanely expensive directives on carbon emissions; and it means – while most of us are impoverished by our inflated utility bills – that the thieves and fat cats who are on top of the carbon trading scam will get stupendously richer and richer.” “The scariest article you will read this year