M.A. Vukcevic: North Atlantic Oscillations – I – New paper

Posted: December 10, 2011 by tallbloke in atmosphere, climate, Ocean dynamics, solar system dynamics

Our regular contributor Vukcevic has been hard at work teasing out the relationship between changes in air pressure and variations in the Atlantic oceanic oscillations. This is very interesting work which will I’m sure generate some further thoughts from others who are interested in atmosphere-ocean interactions such as Roger Andrews and Stephen Wilde.

The North Atlantic’s Subpolar gyre (Image A2) is the engine of the heat transport across the North Atlantic Ocean, which
is a region of the intense ocean – atmosphere interaction. Cold winds remove the surface heat at rates of several
hundred watts per square meter, resulting in deep water convection. These changes in turn affect the strength and
character of the Atlantic thermohaline circulation (THC) and the horizontal flow of the upper ocean, thereby altering the
oceanic poleward heat transport and the distribution of sea surface temperature (SST). (Hurrell et al, 2). The thermohaline
forcing, associated with deep water convection, is
thought to be the source of the ‘Icelandic Low’.
Icelandic Low is a semi-permanent, subpolar
area of low atmospheric pressure in the North Atlantic
Ocean. The strength of the Icelandic Low is the critical
factor in determining path of the polar jet stream over the
North Atlantic.

The full paper is available here:
And here:

  1. vukcevic says:

    Hi TB
    Never heard of the bloke. Thanks.

  2. tallbloke says:

    Hi Vuk,
    Here’s a paper that may be of interest. It calculates probabilities of AMO shifts.

    Click to access Enfield.pdf

    By the way Vuk, what is the outlook for the AMO to 2022, on the basis of the 11 year lead of the pressure data?

  3. vukcevic says:

    Don’t forget it is NEGATIVE Reykjavik pressure, so if you plot pressure you have to invert the waveform.
    The average AMO oscillation is about +-0.3 degrees C, so if correlation holds fall of about 0.2 degrees (out of 0.6 total swing) appear to be on the cards, but that is average from Equator to Greenland.
    From our point of view it is much worse, in the Atlantic box where we get our westerlies (50N-60N,15-50W) range is double +- 0.6 degrees C, so we can expect 0.4-0.5 degrees, which is lot., so January SST in our box may fall from about 7.9 to 7.5 degrees C, translate into land temperature about double, and that is a lot.
    Icelandic atmospheric pressure is very volatile, and for the moment there is no way of telling where it is going to go.

  4. tallbloke says:


    Time to plan that ‘buy a patch of woodland nearer the equator’ trip …

  5. Joe's World says:


    Have you explored the different velocities to the currents?
    Pressure of ocean water is another area that is a fascination.

    Click to access world-calculations.pdf

    Click to access world-calculations-2.pdf

    I have been studying how to use pressure to generate power for years now. Trying to break the bonding of water or using spiral vortexes(not promising, friction problems). Still is quite the challenge especially trying to get rid of water volumes that do not equal each other out before reaching the surface.
    Makes for an interesting mind game.

  6. tchannon says:

    How is AMO releated to MPH?

  7. tallbloke says:

    Tim, I’m not sure Marcel Leroux would have recognised the ‘semi-permanent Icelandic low’…

  8. adolfogiurfa says:

    Great work my dear Vuk! . What a strange coincidence with Iceland´s volcanic activity…

  9. vukcevic says:

    OT but might be of interest:
    Recent article by statistician Grant Foster Tamino
    Global temperature evolution 1979–2010

    Click to access 1748-9326_6_4_044022.pdf

    it’s absolute nonsense!

  10. Jostemikk says:

    Thank’s Tallbloke and Vukcevic! As far I’m aware of, this is the first sceptical peer reviewed paper from norwegian scientists, and more about NAO:

    Identifying natural contributions to late Holocene climate change – Ole Humlum, Jan-Erik Solheim, Kjell Stordahl

    Click to access 11IdentifyingNaturalContributionsToLateHoloceneClimateChange%20%20HumlumEtAl%20%20GlobalAndPlanetaryChange%201012pdf.pdf

  11. adolfogiurfa says:

    This relates, of course, to your work:

    which contains the following image (it worths ” a thousand words”)

    Which takes me, in my condition of ignorant layman, to relate it to:

  12. Stephen Wilde says:

    I’m with Vuk on the significance of the AMO and I think I have a handle on his NAP (North Atlantic Precursor) but we have a slight difference on cause and effect which we have tentatively discussed elsewhere.

    Basically I think Vuk has a problem in getting his work to mesh with the upper atmospheric changes leading to a change in tropospheric heights that seem to correlate with solar activity.

    Vuk considers that temperature changes above 8 or 9 km don’t matter much to the troposphere due to the lower atmospheric density but I think they do matter because they affect the height of the inversion at the tropopause which puts an effective lid on everything that goes on in the troposphere.

    It is the height of that lid (variable with latitude) which dictates the surface air pressure distribution, the size, intensity and positions of the permanent climate zones and thus the speed of energy flow through the system.

    It is that speed of energy flow that I see as the critical determinant as regards the energy content of the entire Earth system.

    We seem to have the benefit of a highly efficient thermostat whereby any forcing is negated by a change in the speed of energy throughput.

    The ‘cost’ of such a change in the speed of throughput is changes in the size intensity and latitudinal positions of the permanent climate zones with no change in system energy content necessary.

    All perceived climate change would appear to be simple variations in the positions of surface locations relative to the permanent climate zones.

    The actual equilibrium temperature that the system always seeks to maintain is set by atmospheric pressure, solar shortwave input and the physical properties of the molecular bonds between water molecules.

    As explained here:

    Click to access TheSettingAndMaintainingOfEarth.pdf

    “The Setting and Maintaining of Earth’s Equilibrium Temperature”

  13. vukcevic says:

    Eyjafjallajökull erupted in April 2010, then December 2010 was second coldest on the record: http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/CET-Dec.htm

    The stratosphere is affected to any significant degree (that matters to us on the ground level) by volcanic eruptions which split-up jet stream.

    Click to access SSW.pdf

  14. adolfogiurfa says:

    And….as this involves WATER, and water´s molecule is ICOSAEDRIC, as Democritus said,and as it was found, 2,500 years after, by Dr.Linus Pauling.

    Democritus wrote a book about the “Magnet Stone”-“(Imán in spanish, after the Arabic Imam: There are two Imams guarding the Kaaba, at each corner of it. )….Guarding the Power which moves the universe.

  15. tallbloke says:

    Vuk: I find it amusing that Rahmsdorf and the mathturbater in chief have chosen to end their series at the peak of the 2010 el nino, when their paper hasn’t been submitted until 27 sept 2011.

    I thought Grant Foster was keen to avoid ‘cherry picking’.

    The rest of the paper seems to be of the standard we’ve come to expect from the committed warmista. Uncritically adopted unrealistic volcanic forcings, complete lack of understanding regarding solar contribution, using near surface temp as the gold standard instead of considering ocean heat content, disregarding the natural cycles evident in longer term datasets etc etc.

    Another stinker.

  16. vukcevic says:

    See my two posts on the latest WUWT thread

  17. vukcevic says:

    Related to and referencing the above:
    Bit Tooth Energy