I’d not followed up on the saga of DMS, a reminder came up so I’ve dug out the tale up to 2003 or so. What then, can anyone add more? Because IPCC AR4 looks to me to be obfuscating. Best do a quick scan of the long article before dipping too deeply into links.
“Dimethyl sulfide (DMS) or methylthiomethane is an organosulfur compound with the formula (CH3)2S. Dimethyl sulfide is a water-insoluble flammable liquid that boils at 37 °C (99 °F) and has a characteristic disagreeable odor. It is a component of the smell produced from cooking of certain vegetables, notably maize, cabbage, beetroot and seafoods.”
And the smell of seaside. Stinky stuff is Sulphur.
__ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimethyl_sulfide
Why mention this on the Talkshop?
Ocean critters produce the stuff, a very complex situation.
The C is produced from CO2. S probably from volcanoes. Predation of the critters is also involved etc. part of a food chain. Sulphur is in short supply, so bad that farming often needs additional input wherein lies yet another sad tale of enviro own goals, perhaps too why volcanic soils are lauded as highly productive.
Dated 2000
- Abstract. Continuous measurements of atmospheric dimethylsulfide (DMS) have been performed over a 10-year period (1990-1999) at Amsterdam Island in the southern Indian Ocean. Atmospheric DMSranges from 5 to1930 parts per trillion by volume (pptv) and shows a clear seasonal variation with a factor of 20 in amplitude between its maximum in January (austral summer) and minimum in July-August (austral winter). Important deviations from the 10-year monthly mean as high as 100% have been detected, which could not be explained by changes in meteorology and/or oxidation capacity of the atmosphere. Comparison with a three dimensional (3-D) chemistry/transport model revealed that changes in the source strength of DMS as high as a factor of 2 were required to account for such DMS interannual variations. In addition, DMS variability was found to be closely related to sea surface temperature anomalies, clearly indicating a link between DMS and climate changes.
— [1]
Fig 7a from Sciare et al
From this I assume there is a strong positive cloud seeding temperature coefficient but suitable data for an attempt at computing effect does not seem to exist.
I notice old NOAA content, so NOAA are aware. Why is there no fuss about this, or maybe I have missed it.
Also just to make things even more involved UV is at work
- UV radiation has a role in a number of the key processes controlling DMS concentrations in seawater.
— http://core.kmi.open.ac.uk/download/pdf/2709412.pdf
Here is a fairly comprehensive article.
Dimethylsulfide Emissions: Climate Control by Marine Algae?
Nov 2003
K B Norris
CSA Editor, Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts, Oceanic Abstracts
B.A. (Biology Environmental) University of California, Santa Barbara
Snippet
- may have changed by a factor of 6 between glacial and interglacial times (Legrand et al., 1991)
— http://saga.pmel.noaa.gov/dms/DMSweb_program_descript.html
Now for a major work,
Following is a pair of plots, a and b
Tim’s observation: Sulphur is involved, Iceland, Alaska, Kamchatka, Mediterranean, South Andes.
Antarctica, upwelling water, plus maybe some volcanic.
Annual map follows, also pertinent
Kettle Et Al,: Sea Surface Dimethylsulphide Measurements
Global Biogeochemical Cycles, June 1999
— http://saga.pmel.noaa.gov/dms/ (page last updated Feb 2004)
This is a monumentally large PDF (100MB) is a scan of a major work which is trying to put together a first global view.
This feedback cycle was hypothesized to modify global climate, and if the overall sign of the feedback is negative, it would act to counter greenhouse warming.
I am finding dormant work after work. What happened after say 2003?
And IPCC? I’ve seen plenty saying modelling is very hard, need to use data.
When you read the following remember the strong sea temperature characteristic. The following mentions a slight rise for tripling CO2. Finally a tiny negative feedback without mentioning ocean temperature. Seem to think it is the wind.
7.5.1.4 Aerosols from Dimethyl Sulphide
Dimethyl sulphide produced by phytoplankton is the most abundant form in which the ocean releases gaseous sulphur. Sea-air fluxes of DMS vary by orders of magnitude depending mainly on DMS sea surface concentration and on wind speed. Estimates of the global DMS flux vary widely depending mainly on the DMS sea surface climatology utilised, sea-air exchange parametrization and wind speed data, and range from 16 to 54 Tg yr–1 of sulphur (see Kettle and Andreae, 2000 for a review). According to model studies (Gondwe et al., 2003; Kloster et al., 2006), 18 to 27% of the DMS is converted into sulphate aerosols. Penner et al. (2001) show a small increase in DMS emissions between 2000 and 2100 (from 26.0 to 27.7 Tg yr–1 of sulphur) using constant DMS sea surface concentrations together with a constant monthly climatological ice cover. Gabric et al. (2004) predict an increase of the globally integrated DMS flux perturbation of 14% for a tripling of the pre-industrial atmospheric CO2 concentration.Bopp et al. (2004) estimate the feedback of DMS to cloud albedo with a coupled atmosphere-ocean-biogeochemical climate model that includes phytoplankton species in the ocean and a sulphur cycle in the atmospheric climate model. They obtain an increase in the sea-air DMS flux of 3% for doubled atmospheric CO2 conditions, with large spatial heterogeneities (–15 to +30%). The mechanisms affecting those fluxes are marine biology, relative abundance of phytoplankton types and wind intensity. The simulated increase in fluxes causes an increase in sulphate aerosols and, hence, cloud droplets resulting in a radiative perturbation of cloud albedo of –0.05 W m–2, which represents a small negative climate feedback to global warming.
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch7s7-5-1-4.html
Could this stuff actually explain the volcano cooling effect?
Same goes for the ocean heat spike followed by a dip, might be so if this stuff gets going and yanks temperature back.
What is the reality?
1. Interannual variability of atmospheric dimethylsulfide in the
southern Indian Ocean
J. SciareLSCE, Orme des Merisiers, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
N. Mihalopoulos ECPL, Department. of Chemistry, University of Crete, Heraklion, Greece
F.J. Dentener IMAU, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
— http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2000JD900236/pdf
2. Light-driven cycling of dimethylsulfide (DMS) in the Sargasso Sea:
Closing the loop
http://www.icess.ucsb.edu/~davey/MyPapers/TooleSiegelGRL2004.pdf
Post by Tim
Tallbloke's Talkshop 
“DMS variability was found to be closely related to sea surface temperature anomalies.” Surprise, surprise! The speed of chemical reactions depends on temperature!
I don’t intend to wade through a 100MB file, but it would be nice to know if the “sea surface temperature anomaly” they used is local or global. Assuming that it is local, it then tells us that a measurement of DMS adds almost nothing to a measurement of temperature.
PDF are hard work but I’ll have a look and see if I can produce a small version at lower fidelity. Quick trial, 28M so maybe.
Reblogged this on Dmh and commented:
Is this related with what is happening on the NH oceans now?
Related to current NH oceans?
Pure guess.
If you mean the ongoing heavy Icelandic sulphur emission yes if there is an effect although we are well past peak insolation heading to a dark Arctic. OTOH the water up there is still warm.
We’ve noticed the “sea” smell we like (emotional memory flashback to our youthful days on the beach) are strong on the west English and northeastern US coast, weak for eastern Newfoundland and absent or very weak on the Californian and Hawaiian shores. I guess the biological cause is now known ) (I speculated it was connected to varying amounts of rotting seaweed of some variety). Cool.
The strong regionality of DMS production is another smack at claim that everything to do with a planetary climate must be global in presence to have a global impact.
If anyone wants a shrunk PDF please ask. 25MB instead of 100MB. I’d prefer if there is a good reason for asking, such as on dialup. In that case contact via the site form and I’ll try and shrink, you won’t need all.
There is no loss of fidelity but the original is a colour scan of paper, not good.
Not a word about DMS and its effect on ozone?
vis e.g. this “antique paper“.
As far as the ozone layer is concerned, and perhaps the olfactory senses, there’s also biogenic methyl bromide being generated in the oceans. That doesn’t need the coexistence of alkenes to react with ozone.
More importantly and perhaps significantly to SST and DMS are the effects on precipitation with dissociated sulphur possibly providing nucleation sites in the energetic atmosphere subjected to high energy particle streams as well as high energy radiation (UV, etc). SPPI produced a report a couple of years ago.
The door is left open Bernd, I’m raising a subject without claiming much at all. What you bring is welcome.
The Talkshop is all about keeping an open mind. Certainly Biology 101 teaches that organisms put the oxygen in our atmosphere, so why not keep an open mind about the role of biology? So then the interesting question becomes: What paces the biology? The spatiotemporal patterns are so much more interesting than the enslaved mechanisms that generate them. The maps were the highlight of this post for me. Thanks for sharing.
Paul: my thoughts exactly. If the biomass of the planet keeps the levels of an unstable and reactive atmosphere so stable, it’s an indication that bio-control of cloud amount is a not inconsiderable factor.
Lovelock wrote about this in the 1970s. Nature controls the weather to suit itself.
Changes in the UV and GCR cause changes in the chemistry of the atmosphere and water.
GCR is able to release oxygen from the ice on the moon. This requires further study, against the changes in the magnetic activity of Sun.
Click to access 1202.5156.pdf
Some confirmation;
† Lovelock, J.E., Maggs, R.J. and Rasmussen, R.A. 1972. Atmospheric dimethyl sulphide and the natural sulphur cycle. Nature, 237, No. 5356, 452-453.
It is clear that changes in solar activity are mainly high latitudes, because there reach most ionizing particles, the GCR have an average higher energy (lower reach).
Galactic radiation is at its highest since the beginning of the measurements in Oulu. Dr. S. says that are just a few percent. But where did he know how this will affect the climate?
http://cosmicrays.oulu.fi/webform/query.cgi?startday=01&startmonth=01&startyear=1965&starttime=00%3A00&endday=27&endmonth=10&endyear=2014&endtime=00%3A00&resolution=Automatic+choice&picture=on
The range of snow in October in Asia is huge (and rapidly increases).
We know that they will be large losses of thermal radiation the sun at the north.
Sulfur from Iceland is perceptible also in Norway and Greenland. Not to mention the whole of Iceland. This is not a small amounts of SO2.
Daily record for October 25 frost fell on Belarus in the night from Friday to Saturday. The coldest place in the country was Klichev Mogilev in the east of the country, where it was minus 12.6 degrees Celsius – Belarusian media reported today.
Previously, the lowest temperature recorded for October 25 in the north of Polotsk in Belarus in 1976. – It was 11.1 degree below zero.
Here is a casual media item I didn’t include in the article. Slight amusement, from Oz quoting UEA
It is not ozone.
“Ozone Smell at the Seaside”
http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2007/06/27/1963637.htm
Flocks of crows flocking from east to west Europe. Expanded a strong Russian High-pressure area. Next week, the arctic air will attack the United States.
http://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/isobaric/1000hPa/overlay=mean_sea_level_pressure/orthographic=30.10,81.39,482
Let’s see the position of the polar vortex.
ren wrote: “Dr. S.”
My assessment based on the laws of large numbers & conservation of angular momentum:
The strategy there is to tell the scientific truth 95% of the time to buy the trust to scientifically lie the 5% of the time when it politically matters most.
TC: re “Ozone Smell at the Seaside”…
‘Seaweeds and the Atmosphere’
http://www.earthzine.org/2012/11/06/seaweeds-and-the-atmosphere/
The more you know the less you know.
At low enough concentrations I find the smell of DMS quite pleasant. Just like tinned water chestnuts.
If you attentively look at the pressure in the north, we notice that the increase in solar activity causes the movement of lows to the north.
Carl Sagan’s aerosol optical physics, one of the core beliefs of the IPCC, is wrong. It’s easy or any professional to prove this: it claims that for thicker fine droplet clouds, more sunlight is backscattered. This is absurd because Mie scattering asymptotes at 0.5 hemispherical albedo.
Therefore, the sign of the AIE is reversed.
Also the AIE does not, with the real direct effect, hide CO2-AGW.
Thus there is near zero CO2-AGW.
Much of the 1980s and 1990s warming was from Asian industrialisation reducing cloud albedo.
The same DMS/CCN physics is responsible for amplification of Milankovitch tsi change at the end of ice ages.
IPCC’s fake fizzics is entering the cremation zone.
AlecM says:
October 27, 2014 at 9:47 am
Carl Sagan’s aerosol optical physics, one of the core beliefs of the IPCC, is wrong. It’s easy or any professional to prove this: it claims that for thicker fine droplet clouds, more sunlight is backscattered. This is absurd because Mie scattering asymptotes at 0.5 hemispherical albedo.
Are you saying that 0.5 Mie is forward scattered?