An alternative metric to assess global warming

Posted: April 30, 2014 by oldbrew in climate, Clouds, Ocean dynamics, radiative theory, Uncertainty

.
.
‘The ocean…is by far the dominant reservoir of climate system heat changes’.

An exclusive from Climate Etc.

Climate Etc.

by Roger A. Pielke Sr., Richard T. McNider, and John Christy

The thing we’ve all forgotten is the heat storage of the ocean – it’s a thousand times greater than the atmosphere and the surface.  – James Lovelock

View original post 1,636 more words

Comments
  1. oldbrew says:
    April 30, 2014 at 10:17 am

    A few other references:

    http://www.sciencebits.com/calorimeter

    http://www.drroyspencer.com/2014/04/ssmi-global-ocean-product-update-increasing-clouds-with-a-chance-of-cooling/

    Ocean heat content uncertainties

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vortex_tube
    (see Dr Spencer’s post above)

    http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/new-paper-shows-climate-modelers-dont.html

  2. stephen richards says:
    April 30, 2014 at 12:40 pm

    The big problem with this idea is that GHC is a LAGGING indicator. The cheats will be screaming ” the planet is burning up” at a time when it is actually cooling.

  3. WJohn says:
    April 30, 2014 at 3:12 pm

    When that wizard idea fails to fly there is always the earth’s core. Many gazzillion tons (or even tonnes) of iron make a great heat sink.

  4. michael hart says:
    April 30, 2014 at 5:46 pm

    “The thing we’ve all forgotten is the heat storage of the ocean – it’s a thousand times greater than the atmosphere and the surface.” – James Lovelock

    Kudos to Lovelock for admitting he may have forgotten it, but people like Pielke, McNider, Christy, and Judith Curry never did forget. The thought was late coming to people like Lovelock, even after the atmosphere stopped warming.

    Judith Curry sensibly also links to her earlier article which sensibly asks “how good is the ocean heat content data?”. If we can’t sample the ocean and it’s currents any better than the atmosphere then the point becomes irrelevant.

  5. ren says:
    April 30, 2014 at 7:17 pm

    I draw your attention to the blockade of the southern polar vortex in the vicinity of the magnetic pole. Cosmic rays quite high.

  6. ren says:
    April 30, 2014 at 7:21 pm

    This is how looks like visualization.
    http://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/isobaric/70hPa/orthographic=26.64,-101.37,365

  7. catweazle666 says:
    April 30, 2014 at 7:29 pm

    “The thing we’ve all forgotten is the heat storage of the ocean – it’s a thousand times greater than the atmosphere and the surface.”

    Which means that for any given energy input, the temperature change will be one thousandth of that of the atmosphere.

    Good luck measuring that.

  8. p.g.sharrow says:
    April 30, 2014 at 9:45 pm

    @ren interesting graphics. I get the impression that I am looking at a 2 dimensional representation of a 3 dimensional thing. It has always appeared to me that magnetics and gravity have a lot more to do with weather steering then meteorology would accept. High and low pressure areas just don’t jibe with surface heating and cooling. Of course as an electrician I use an electric hammer to deal with the world. 😉 Mater in motion makes electrical fields, electrical fields moves mater. Fluid dynamics of charge and motion. pg

  9. Brian H says:
    May 5, 2014 at 9:00 am

    pg;
    ‘mater’ is Latin for mother. Matter is stuff.

  10. p.g.sharrow says:
    May 5, 2014 at 5:32 pm

    @Brian; Does it matter? Communication is the object. 😉 spelling is not my foretay. Actually without this crappy spell checker I would be totally lost. 😦 pg