Ocean surface temperatures at all time high

[Montanan]

"Ocean surface temperatures have hit an all-time high this month, breaking every record since satellite measurements began in the 1980s.

Temperatures reached a global average of 69.98 Fahrenheit (21.1 degrees Celsius) in the first days of April. The previous record of 69.9 F (21 degrees C) was set in March 2016. Both are more than a degree higher than the global average between 1982 and 2011, which runs at around 68.72 F (20.4 C) in early spring, according to data from the University of Maine Climate Reanalyzer.

The new record is the result of the buildup of heat from climate change, now unsuppressed by La Niña — a natural ocean cycle of cold surface temperatures in the eastern Pacific that had been ongoing for three years, but which ended in March"

. . .

Currently, the Pacific is in a neutral state of neither El Niño nor La Niña. But forecast models put the chances of tipping into an El Niño later this year at roughly 60%, McPhaden said, which could mean another record-breaking heat year. There is typically a lag between when these oceanic cycles start and when surface temperatures heat up, he said.

"It’s likely that if we have a big El Niño, we would see a new record set in 2024," for the average global land and ocean temperatures.


https://www.livescience.com/ocean-surface-temperature-record

[GordMay]

Montanan’s Live Science article:
“The surface of the ocean is now so hot it's broken every record since satellite measurements began”
Hot link ➥ https://www.livescience.com/ocean-su...erature-record

'Daily Sea Surface Temperature (April 13/23)’ ~ Climate Reanalyzer at the University of Maine
➥ https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/

Q: Why do these SST data matter to cruisers?

A: Global patterns of sea surface temperatures [SST] are an important factor for weather forecasts, and climate outlooks. This supply of increased warmth means the atmosphere can hold more moisture; therefore, it can increase precipitation, and the warmer the water, the more likely it is to generate extreme weather events.

While heat energy is stored and mixed throughout the depth of the ocean, the temperature of water right at the sea's surface [where the ocean is in direct contact with the atmosphere] plays a significant role in weather and short-term climate.
Where sea surface temperatures are high, relatively large amounts of heat energy and moisture [water vapour] enter the atmosphere, sometimes producing powerful, drenching storms downwind.
In these [warmer SST] conditions, if there is a storm, it is very likely that it will produce very intense rain [or snow].
In addition, these conditions increase the thermal stress of marine animals, which can affect the food chain and, ultimately, human nutrition.

Conversely, lower sea surface temperatures mean less evaporation, and less extreme weather events.

[Montanan]

Thank you Gord for providing perspective on the implications of the warming oceans. The oceans are by far the most significant heat sink associated with global warming, far more than the warming of the atmosphere which sensible heat is what we tend to be aware of because we can feel the air and the humidity within the air.

Indeed, a warming ocean provides for greater evaporation, as does warming air passing over the ocean because warm air can hold much more water in vapor phase than cooler air, exponentially more absolute humidity.

Water in vapor phase has a huge amount of thermal energy in the dihydrogen oxide molecules which energy is in latent [non-sensible] form; there is much more latent thermal energy than sensible energy in water in vapor phase.

Water in vapor phase [humidity] is the primary greenhouse effect gas in the atmosphere representing 80+% of the blocking of thermal radiation from the earth to space. The amount of water in vapor phase in the earth's atmosphere is projected to increase by 10 to 25% between now and 2100 due to a combination of anthropogenic emissions and a warming planet and the warming atmosphere being capable of holding far more water.

"Water vapour does contribute to anthropogenic global warming, . . .
H2O is the strongest greenhouse gas, because it has a profound infrared absorption spectrum with more and broader absorption bands than CO2. Its concentration in the atmosphere is limited by air temperature, so that radiative forcing by water vapour increases with global warming (positive feedback)." - Wikipedia


Water Vapor Confirmed as Major Player in Climate Change

https://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/vapor_warming.html
Snipets:

"Water vapor is known to be Earth’s most abundant greenhouse gas, but the extent of its contribution to global warming has been debated. Using recent NASA satellite data, researchers have estimated more precisely than ever the heat-trapping effect of water in the air, validating the role of the gas as a critical component of climate change."
. . .

Everyone agrees that if you add carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, then warming will result,” Dessler said. “So the real question is, how much warming?"
The answer can be found by estimating the magnitude of water vapor feedback. Increasing water vapor leads to warmer temperatures, which causes more water vapor to be absorbed into the air. Warming and water absorption increase in a spiraling cycle.
Water vapor feedback can also amplify the warming effect of other greenhouse gases, such that the warming brought about by increased carbon dioxide allows more water vapor to enter the atmosphere.

"The difference in an atmosphere with a strong water vapor feedback and one with a weak feedback is enormous,"

. . .

“This new data set shows that as surface temperature increases, so does atmospheric humidity,” Dessler said. “Dumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere makes the atmosphere more humid. And since water vapor is itself a greenhouse gas, the increase in humidity amplifies the warming from carbon dioxide."

Specifically, the team found that if Earth warms 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit, the associated increase in water vapor will trap an extra 2 Watts of energy per square meter (about 11 square feet).

"That number may not sound like much, but add up all of that energy over the entire Earth surface and you find that water vapor is trapping a lot of energy," Dessler said. "We now think the water vapor feedback is extraordinarily strong, capable of doubling the warming due to carbon dioxide alone."




Yet a transformative, technological resolution awaits, disclosure regarding that will be provided a bit later this year. Rapid progress is being made here in The Last Best Place, Montana.

[AKA-None]

So not Mars but Venus

Obviously direction not necessarily end point

[Montanan]

Average Sea Surface Temperature chart from NOAA:

2023 is charging up the chart.

[Ryban]

I've been thinking about this a lot as we start planning for our Pacific crossing in a few years. Though seasonal weather patterns will likely be more or less the same, the timing and intensity of the events within these seasons is likely to become less predictable, and I would be lying if I said it doesn't worry me a little.

A lot of the traditional an anecdotal sailing wisdom, I think, will become less applicable, so I my hope is that science can stay ahead from a forecasting standpoint, and it certainly does help that connectivity and obtaining weather at sea is a whole lot easier now than it was when the climate was more stable.

[Tin Tin]

Originally Posted by Montanan

Thank you Gord for providing perspective on the implications of the warming oceans. The oceans are by far the most significant heat sink associated with global warming, far more than the warming of the atmosphere which sensible heat is what we tend to be aware of because we can feel the air and the humidity within the air.

Indeed, a warming ocean provides for greater evaporation, as does warming air passing over the ocean because warm air can hold much more water in vapor phase than cooler air, exponentially more absolute humidity.

Water in vapor phase has a huge amount of thermal energy in the dihydrogen oxide molecules which energy is in latent [non-sensible] form; there is much more latent thermal energy than sensible energy in water in vapor phase.

Water in vapor phase [humidity] is the primary greenhouse effect gas in the atmosphere representing 80+% of the blocking of thermal radiation from the earth to space. The amount of water in vapor phase in the earth's atmosphere is projected to increase by 10 to 25% between now and 2100 due to a combination of anthropogenic emissions and a warming planet and the warming atmosphere being capable of holding far more water.

"Water vapour does contribute to anthropogenic global warming, . . .
H2O is the strongest greenhouse gas, because it has a profound infrared absorption spectrum with more and broader absorption bands than CO2. Its concentration in the atmosphere is limited by air temperature, so that radiative forcing by water vapour increases with global warming (positive feedback)." - Wikipedia


Water Vapor Confirmed as Major Player in Climate Change

https://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/vapor_warming.html
Snipets:

"Water vapor is known to be Earth’s most abundant greenhouse gas, but the extent of its contribution to global warming has been debated. Using recent NASA satellite data, researchers have estimated more precisely than ever the heat-trapping effect of water in the air, validating the role of the gas as a critical component of climate change."
. . .

Everyone agrees that if you add carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, then warming will result,” Dessler said. “So the real question is, how much warming?"
The answer can be found by estimating the magnitude of water vapor feedback. Increasing water vapor leads to warmer temperatures, which causes more water vapor to be absorbed into the air. Warming and water absorption increase in a spiraling cycle.
Water vapor feedback can also amplify the warming effect of other greenhouse gases, such that the warming brought about by increased carbon dioxide allows more water vapor to enter the atmosphere.

"The difference in an atmosphere with a strong water vapor feedback and one with a weak feedback is enormous,"

. . .

“This new data set shows that as surface temperature increases, so does atmospheric humidity,” Dessler said. “Dumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere makes the atmosphere more humid. And since water vapor is itself a greenhouse gas, the increase in humidity amplifies the warming from carbon dioxide."

Specifically, the team found that if Earth warms 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit, the associated increase in water vapor will trap an extra 2 Watts of energy per square meter (about 11 square feet).

"That number may not sound like much, but add up all of that energy over the entire Earth surface and you find that water vapor is trapping a lot of energy," Dessler said. "We now think the water vapor feedback is extraordinarily strong, capable of doubling the warming due to carbon dioxide alone."




Yet a transformative, technological resolution awaits, disclosure regarding that will be provided a bit later this year. Rapid progress is being made here in The Last Best Place, Montana.

And then in one go you can get 10% added to water vapor by non gas means https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/tonga-...o-stratosphere

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by Tin Tin

And then in one go you can get 10% added to water vapor by non gas means https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/tonga-...o-stratosphere

Interesting article, about an interesting study [1].

According to the study [1], reported on, in Tin Tin's linked article, volcanic eruptions can (rarely) also contribute to surface warming, due to the excess stratospheric H2O forcing, through direct injection of H2O into the stratosphere.
This doesn’t represent an either/or climate forcing, but an additional (fairly unique - “unprecedented”) additive factor.

[1] “The Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai Hydration of the Stratosphere” ~ by L. Millán et al
Open access ➥ https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley....9/2022GL099381

Originally Posted by L. Millán et al

“... This eruption could impact climate not through surface cooling due to sulfate aerosols, but rather through surface warming due to the radiative forcing from the excess stratospheric H2O ...”
... Three natural pathways for direct injection of H2O into the stratosphere exist: overshooting convection, pyrocumulonimbus (pyroCb) storms, and volcanic eruptions ...
... the radiative forcing from even small variations in lower stratospheric H2O could induce decadal-scale changes in global-mean surface temperature ... Previous studies of the radiative effects of stratospheric H2O perturbations, including direct volcanic injection, have shown that they can cause surface warming ...
... Given the extraordinary magnitude of the HT-HH H2O injection and the fact that its anticipated stratospheric residence time exceeds the typical 2–3 years timescale for sulfate aerosols to fall out of the stratosphere (Joshi & Jones, 2009), HT-HH may be the first volcanic eruption observed to impact climate not through surface cooling caused by volcanic sulfate aerosols, but rather through surface warming caused by excess H2O radiative forcing ...
... Unlike previous strong eruptions in the satellite era, HT-HH could impact climate not through surface cooling due to sulfate aerosols, but rather through surface warming due to the excess stratospheric H2O forcing ...

[Tin Tin]

So, any sea temp rises from Jan 2022 and increases in water vapor need to be discounted from the last years averages and maybe for the next few years. I wonder what the adjusted figures might be.

[SailOar]

Originally Posted by Tin Tin

So, any sea temp rises from Jan 2022 and increases in water vapor need to be discounted from the last years averages and maybe for the next few years. I wonder what the adjusted figures might be.

Your suggestion may be premature.

Given the extraordinary magnitude of the HT-HH H2O injection and the fact that its anticipated stratospheric residence time exceeds the typical 2–3 years timescale for sulfate aerosols to fall out of the stratosphere (Joshi & Jones, 2009), HT-HH may be the first volcanic eruption observed to impact climate not through surface cooling caused by volcanic sulfate aerosols, but rather through surface warming caused by excess H2O radiative forcing ...

... Unlike previous strong eruptions in the satellite era, HT-HH could impact climate not through surface cooling due to sulfate aerosols, but rather through surface warming due to the excess stratospheric H2O forcing ...

For the first few years after the eruption the heating effect from H2O forcing may be offset by the cooling effect from sulfate aerosols.

[Tin Tin]

Originally Posted by SailOar

Your suggestion may be premature.



For the first few years after the eruption the heating effect from H2O forcing may be offset by the cooling effect from sulfate aerosols.

Sure, may be, may be not, no one really knows.

[Montanan]

Interesting Newsweek article:

The Impact of Ocean Temperatures Hitting 40 Year High
Published today.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/to...26d1950&ei=103

A snipet:

"If these trends continue, increased ocean temperatures may have major impacts on many marine species at all levels of the food chain.

"This will impact many life forms and especially primary producers which live [on] the surface as they are dependent on sunlight for fixing CO2," Thomas Mock, a marine microbiologist at the University of East Anglia in the U.K., told Newsweek.

"Primary producers in the oceans are mainly algae from microscopic size to the size of trees. To efficiently fix atmospheric CO2, they require nutrients. However, if the ocean warms up, vertical mixing is reduced because a warm layer basically like a lid sits on top of the ocean. We call this ocean stratification. This limits the flow of nutrients to where primary producers are (surface layers). Hence, productivity is reduced potentially leading to a positive feedback loop as less CO2 is being fixed (loop: anthropogenic CO2 leads to heat, and this leads to more CO2 remaining in the atmosphere because of reduced uptake by oceanic primary producers)."

[GordMay]

See also:
“An Overview of Ocean Climate Change Indicators: Sea Surface Temperature, Ocean Heat Content, Ocean pH, Dissolved Oxygen Concentration, Arctic Sea Ice Extent, Thickness and Volume, Sea Level and Strength of the AMOC (Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation”
~ by Carlos Garcia-Soto et al (Frontiers in Marine Science, 21 September, 2021)
Full Study ➥ https://www.frontiersin.org/articles...21.642372/full

[Montanan]

Study reveals frightening cause behind mass deaths among crabs and sea creatures: ‘A 34% rise in mortality’


What are marine heatwaves?
A marine heatwave is defined as an extended period of time –– more than five days –– during which water temperatures are more than 90% above the region’s average.

Brazilian researchers working from Brazil, Norway, and the United States studied this phenomenon and published their findings in the journal Estuarine, Coastal, and Shelf Science.

They conducted research on the coast of São Paulo, Brazil where, according to their findings, there is projected to be a 35% increase in marine heatwaves by the year 2100. Species at the bottom of the food chain may be most devastated by this, which doesn’t spell good news for those at the top, or anywhere else.

The researchers focused on the potential impacts of marine heatwaves on the larvae of Leptuca thayeri, otherwise known as the Atlantic mangrove fiddler crab, to come to this conclusion.

“A rise of 2 degrees Celcius in sea surface temperature during the first three to four days of their lives led to a 15% drop in the survival rate compared with larvae at the average temperature for the region,” said Murilo Zanetti Marochi, first author of the paper. “A rise of 4 degrees Celcius led to a 34% rise in mortality.”



https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/...d6331f03&ei=22

[Striker]

Yays…….but while looking at launch dates to try to align an offshore jaunt with a booster landing on a barge offshore FL I was amazed at how many rocket launches are happening these days. A LOT!!!!
Then I wondered about the carbon footprint of said launches. Depends on the fuel somewhat, however Elon uses kerosene mix on his Falcons. Aaaaannnndddd it puts carbon soot (A LOT) in the worst possible place……up there.
My point, give it a while…..the increasing number of launches will soon have an impact enough to cool things off. Just be patient.