Spanish Eyes Imaginary Climate Crisis

Itxu Díaz  writes from Spain in American Spectator This Hyperventilating Climate Columnist Needs to Calm Down.  Excerpts in italics with my bolds and added images.

Take a deep breath, buddy.

Let me tell you something. The idiot who presides over the government of my country went a couple of days ago to get his picture taken in front of a still smoldering burnt forest after one of the most serious waves of wildfires in the history of Spain. The origin of the fire was unknown at the time of the visit, although we already knew the causes of its rapid spread: the local people are no longer allowed to manage the forest in the way they have been doing for centuries. Rural people are no longer allowed to keep the forests clear of undergrowth, nor are they allowed to bring in sheep and other animals that help to balance it. A barrage of green laws like the ones you are calling for are behind these bans.

When the Spanish prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, arrived there and made statements, I assumed he would apologize or just show some sympathy towards the victims. But no. All he said was that climate change was to blame for the fire! You might imagine the expressions on the faces of the old farmers as they looked at him from behind blackened faces, their hands swollen and bloody after three days of intense fighting against the flames that had scorched their forest and homes. The funny thing is that he unwittingly told the truth: a reforestation company operating in the area has just admitted that it caused the fire while digging holes for the plantations. This is one of many companies that, driven by climate hysteria, is carrying out massive reforestations to sell greenhouse gas offset credits to large corporations.

So, indeed, climate change was to blame for the fire,
but not in the way you and Sanchez would have us believe.

My prime minister has the same pathology as you. However, Sanchez pretends he cares about the climate because he knows it is the progressive trend of the moment; the truth is that he doesn’t care because of his extreme psychopathy. I’m sure your claim is much more sincere.

I worry about the weather when it’s time to go to the beach, but what keeps me anxious at all hours is inflation, fuel prices, and the threat of a recession in the fall. Things I can touch with my hands. You worry about climate change, and that’s fine, everyone chooses their own ghosts; the bad thing is that the solutions you propose always consist of shearing the middle class with green taxes, sending us to work on bicycles, forcing us to not eat meat, and hindering the work of farmers and ranchers, thanks to whom rich Democrats eat their delicious salads and supreme steaks in Washington.

In short, the solution is to force us to live like back before the first industrial revolution, while the rich and the rulers get to enjoy all the luxuries of the 21st century, use private jets, eat huge steaks, and move around in giant cars escorted by even bigger cars, which I assume all run on rose petals as fuel.

I don’t know, kiddo, go on being overwhelmed by climate change if you want,
but do it with your savings.

You can afford your expensive vices and belief in the climate apocalypse is one of them. Of course, I’m a firm believer in freedom, but you can have them as long as you pay for them with your own damn money. And take a deep breath, buddy, or breathe into a paper bag like in Analyze That, as I heartily wish you a prompt recovery from this nervous climate crisis. I don’t want to even begin to think about your poor nervous system the day you have to deal with, God forbid, a real problem.

Footnote: The Fable of Political Survival

A provincial political leader won the parliamentary election and on the day to take the oath was greeted by the outgoing premier.  Wishing him well, his predecessor gave him three envelopes, explaining it was a tradition.  The envelopes contained advice to be consulted later on if difficulties were encountered.

Not long after taking office, criticisms started up, and the new premier opened the first envelope.  It explained:  “Blame it on the previous administration.”  He followed that advice pointing to past financial mismanagement, and the difficulty undoing bad policies and programs he had inherited.

That calmed things down for awhile, but a year later the excuses were wearing thin.  So he turned to the second envelope which gave the advice:  “Blame it on the federal government.”  A new campaign of announcements focused on delays and shortfalls of federal funding, poor coordination and liaison by federal counterparts, and counterproductive federal policies.

This quieted critics for more than a year, but alas it too began to fall on deaf ears.  It was time to open the third envelope:  ” Blame it on climate change, or else prepare three envelopes.”

See also Climateers Tilting at Windmills 

Arctic Ice Above Average July 16, 2022

 

The image above shows melting of Arctic sea ice extent over the first half of July 2022.  As usual, on the extreme left of the image, the Pacific basins of Bering and Okhotsk seas are entirely open water.  Meanwhile on the lower far right, Hudson Bay ice retreats from 600k km2 to 300k km2 from north to south.  Note center right Hudson Strait opens up between Hudson Bay and Baffin Bay.  At the top center Barents Sea is mostly open water, while Kara Sea upper left lost 200k km2 down to 29% of its last max.  Center left Laptev has melted somewhat, but still retains 63% of its maximum ice extent. The central mass of Arctic ice is intact with some fluctuations back and forth, and as well as Beaufort Sea and CAA (Canadian Arctic Archipelago) were slow to melt in July, retaining 91% of maximum ice in each basin.

The graph below shows the ice extent retreating mid June to mid July compared to some other years and the 16 year average (2006 to 2021 inclusive).

The chart black line shows that on average in these 30 days Arctic ice extent goes down 2.5 Wadhams (M km2).  2022 started nearly average, melted faster than average late June, then went surplus in July continuing to yesterday July 16.  SII was higher than MASIE some days, lower other days, but ended up the same. 2020 started 500k km2 down, and on day 197 was 800k km2 deficit to average. 

The table shows where the ice is distributed compared to average.  Bering and Okhotsk are open water at this point and are dropped from this and future monthly updates. 

Region 2022197 Day 197 Average 2022-Ave. 2020197 2022-2020
 (0) Northern_Hemisphere 8406464 8243242  163222  7467638 938826 
 (1) Beaufort_Sea 971940 857420  114520  933571 38369 
 (2) Chukchi_Sea 669852 624347  45504  613199 56653 
 (3) East_Siberian_Sea 928329 908426  19903  651811 276519 
 (4) Laptev_Sea 566487 546079  20408  133721 432765 
 (5) Kara_Sea 271923 335569  -63647  127208 144715 
 (6) Barents_Sea 15777 56412  -40635  40301 -24524 
 (7) Greenland_Sea 333097 398154  -65057  405198 -72102 
 (8) Baffin_Bay_Gulf_of_St._Lawrence 383118 286652  96466  242131 140987 
 (9) Canadian_Archipelago 784359 706015  78344  737235 47124 
 (10) Hudson_Bay 293184 352063  -58880  495103 -201920 
 (11) Central_Arctic 3186972 3167895  19076  3087401 99571 

The main deficits to average are in  Kara, Barents, Greenland Sea and Hudson Bay,  more than offset by surpluses in  Beaufort, Chukchi, Baffin Bay and CAA.

Illustration by Eleanor Lutz shows Earth’s seasonal climate changes. If played in full screen, the four corners present views from top, bottom and sides. It is a visual representation of scientific datasets measuring Arctic ice extents.

2022 Arctic Ice Usual June Swoon

The image above shows melting of Arctic sea ice extent over the last half of June 2022.  As usual the process of declining ice extent follows a LIFO pattern:  Last In First Out.  That is, the marginal seas are the last to freeze and the first to melt.  Thus on the extreme left of the image, the Pacific basins of Bering and Okhotsk seas are entirely open water.  Meanwhile on the lower right, Hudson Bay ice retreats 400k km2 from north to south.  Note center right Hudson Strait opens up between Hudson Bay and Baffin Bay.  At the top center Barents Sea ice retreated down to 40k km2 or 5% of its last maximum. Kara Sea upper left lost 340k km2 down to 45% of its last max.  Center left Laptev has melted somewhat, but still retains 76% of its maximum ice extent. The central mass of Arctic ice is intact with some fluctuations back and forth, and as well as Beaufort Sea and CAA (Canadian Arctic Archipelago) were slow to melt in June, retaining 97% of maximum ice in each basin.

The graph below shows the ice extent retreating during June compared to some other years and the 16 year average (2006 to 2021 inclusive).

The chart black line shows that on average in June Arctic ice extent goes down 1.8M km2.  2020, as well as 2007 started June above average, but ended the month matching average. SII was higher than MASIE some days, but ended up the same.  Since Hudson Bay melts the most at this time, the dark green line shows the Arctic total excluding Hudson Bay (HB).  The light green is 2022 minus HB, showing that most of the surplus to average ice was in Hudson Bay starting June, and then retreated to average in the second half of June.  Again note that Hudson Bay is outside the Arctic circle and will be open water soon.

The table shows where the ice is distributed compared to average.  Bering and Okhotsk are open water at this point and are dropped from this and future monthly updates. 

Region 2022181 Day 181 Average 2022-Ave. 2020181 2022-2020
 (0) Northern_Hemisphere 9732940 9751345  -18405  9164791 568149 
 (1) Beaufort_Sea 1033264 921004  112260  983906 49358 
 (2) Chukchi_Sea 717500 723606  -6105  734107 -16607 
 (3) East_Siberian_Sea 1060947 1006910  54037  879242 181705 
 (4) Laptev_Sea 690688 700482  -9794  522834 167855 
 (5) Kara_Sea 416591 550493  -133903  292013 124578 
 (6) Barents_Sea 48841 121301  -72460  145978 -97137 
 (7) Greenland_Sea 480208 501184  -20976  422780 57427 
 (8) Baffin_Bay_Gulf_of_St._Lawrence 647844 505146  142698  479013 168831 
 (9) Canadian_Archipelago 828864 777527  51337  772844 56020 
 (10) Hudson_Bay 618405 712913  -94508  687820 -69416 
 (11) Central_Arctic 3181467 3205732  -24265  3235700 -54234 

The main deficits to average are in  Kara, Barents and Hudson Bay,  offset by surpluses in  Beaufort, East Siberian, Baffin Bay and CAA.

Illustration by Eleanor Lutz shows Earth’s seasonal climate changes. If played in full screen, the four corners present views from top, bottom and sides. It is a visual representation of scientific datasets measuring Arctic ice extents.

OMG! Doomsday Glacier Melting

With the potential to raise global sea levels, Antarctica’s Thwaites Glacier has been widely nicknamed the ‘Doomsday Glacier’

Climate alarms often involve big numbers in far away places threatening you in your backyard.  Today’s example of such a scare comes from Daily Mail  Antarctica’s ‘Doomsday Glacier’ is melting at the fastest rate for 5,500 YEARS – and could raise global sea levels by up to 11 FEET, study warns.  Excerpts in italics with my bolds.

Although these vulnerable glaciers were relatively stable during the past few millennia, their current rate of retreat is accelerating and already raising global sea level,’ said Dr Dylan Rood of Imperial’s Department of Earth Science and Engineering, who co-authored the study.

The West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) is home to the Thwaites and Pine Island glaciers, and has been thinning over the past few decades amid rising global temperatures.  The Thwaites glacier currently measures 74,131 square miles (192,000 square kilometres) – around the same size as Great Britain.  Meanwhile, at 62,662 square miles (162,300 square kilometres), the Pine Island glacier is around the same size as Florida.  Together, the pair have the potential to cause enormous rises in global sea level as they melt.

‘These currently elevated rates of ice melting may signal that those vital arteries from the heart of the WAIS have been ruptured, leading to accelerating flow into the ocean that is potentially disastrous for future global sea level in a warming world,’ Dr Rood said.

‘We now urgently need to work out if it’s too late to stop the bleeding.’

On the Contrary

From Volcano Active Foundation:  West Antarctica hides almost a hundred volcanoes under the ice:

The colossal West Antarctic ice sheet hides what appears to be the largest volcanic region on the planet, according to the results of a study carried out by researchers at the University of Edinburgh (UK) and reported in the journal Geological Society.

Experts have discovered as many as 91 volcanoes under Antarctic ice, the largest of which is as high as Switzerland’s Eiger volcano, rising 3,970 meters above sea level.

“We found 180 peaks, but we discounted 50 because they didn’t match the other data,” explains Robert Bingham, co-author of the paper. They eventually found 138 peaks under the West Antarctic ice sheet, including 47 volcanoes already known because their peaks protrude through the ice, leaving the figure of 91 newly discovered.

Source: volcanofoundation with glacier locations added

The media narrative blames glacier changes on a “warming world,” code for our fault for burning fossil fuels.  And as usual, it is lying by omission.  Researcher chaam jamal explains in her article A Climate Science Obsession with the Thwaites Glacier.  Excerpts in italics with my bolds.

It appears that costly and sophisticated research by these very dedicated climate scientists has made the amazing discovery that maps the deep channels on the seafloor bathymetry by which warm water reaches the underside of the Thwaites glacier and thus explains how this Doomsday glacier melts.

Yet another consideration, not given much attention in this research, is the issue not of identifying the channels by which the deep ocean waters flow to the bottom of the Doomsday Glacier, but of identifying the source of the heat that makes the water warm. Only if that source of heat is anthropogenic global warming caused by fossil fuel emissions that can be moderated by taking climate action, can the observed melt at the bottom of the Thwaites glacier be attributed to AGW climate change.

However, no such finding is made in this research project possibly because these researchers know, as do most researchers who study Antarctica, that this region of Antarctica is extremely geologically active. It is located directly above the West Antarctic Rift system with 150 active volcanoes on the sea floor and right in the middle of the Marie Byrd Mantle Plume with hot magma seeping up from the mantle.

Ralph Alexander updates the situation in 2022 with his article No Evidence That Thwaites Glacier in Antarctica Is about to Collapse.  Excerpts in italics with my bolds.

Contrary to recent widespread media reports and dire predictions by a team of earth scientists, Antarctica’s Thwaites Glacier – the second fastest melting glacier on the continent – is not on the brink of collapse. The notion that catastrophe is imminent stems from a basic misunderstanding of ice sheet dynamics in West Antarctica.

Because the ice shelf already floats on the ocean, collapse of the shelf itself and release of a flotilla of icebergs wouldn’t cause global sea levels to rise. But the researchers argue that loss of the ice shelf would speed up glacier flow, increasing the contribution to sea level rise of the Thwaites Glacier – often dubbed the “doomsday glacier” – from 4% to 25%.

But such a drastic scenario is highly unlikely, says geologist and UN IPCC expert reviewer Don Easterbrook. The misconception is about the submarine “grounding” of the glacier terminus, the boundary between the glacier and its ice shelf extending out over the surrounding ocean, as illustrated in the next figure.

A glacier is not restrained by ice at its terminus. Rather, the terminus is established by a balance between ice gains from snow accumulation and losses from melting and iceberg calving. The removal of ice beyond the terminus will not cause unstoppable collapse of either the glacier or the ice sheet behind it.

Other factors are important too, one of which is the source area of Antarctic glaciers. Ice draining into the Thwaites Glacier is shown in the right figure above in dark green, while ice draining into the Pine Island glacier is shown in light green; light and dark blue represent ice draining into the Ross Sea to the south of the two glaciers.

The two glaciers between them drain only a relatively small portion of the West Antarctic ice sheet, and the total width of the Thwaites and Pine Island glaciers constitutes only about 170 kilometers (100 miles) of the 4,000 kilometers (2,500) miles of West Antarctic coastline.

Of more importance are possible grounding lines for the glacier terminus. The retreat of the present grounding line doesn’t mean an impending calamity because, as Easterbrook points out, multiple other grounding lines exist. Although the base of much of the West Antarctic ice sheet, including the Thwaites glacier, lies below sea level, there are at least six potential grounding lines above sea level, as depicted in the following figure showing the ice sheet profile. A receding glacier could stabilize at any of these lines, contrary to the claims of the recent research study.

As can be seen, the deepest parts of the subglacial basin lie beneath the central portion of the ice sheet where the ice is thickest. What is significant is the ice thickness relative to its depth below sea level. While the subglacial floor at its deepest is 2,000 meters (6,600 feet) below sea level, almost all the subglacial floor in the above profile is less than 1,000 meters (3,300 feet) below the sea. Since the ice is mostly more than 2,500 meters (8,200 ft) thick, it couldn’t float in 1,000 meters (3,300 feet) of water anyway.

 

 

Mid June Arctic Ice Returns to Mean

The Arctic ice melting season was delayed this year as shown by the end of May (day 151) surplus of 600k km2 over the 16-yr average.  Since then both MASIE and SII show a steep decline in Arctic ice extents, now matching the average for June 15 (day 166).  The reports show that Barents alone lost 320k km2, Laptev down 200k km2, Baffin Bay lost 165k km2, Chukchi, Kara, Greenland seas all lost around 100k km2 each.

For the month of June Hudson Bay will take the stage.  Above average early in June. Hudson Bay lost 100k km2 the last six days. Being a shallow basin, it will likely lose much of its 1M km2 in a few weeks.

Why is this important?  All the claims of global climate emergency depend on dangerously higher temperatures, lower sea ice, and rising sea levels.  The lack of additional warming is documented in a post Adios, Global Warming

The lack of acceleration in sea levels along coastlines has been discussed also.  See USCS Warnings of Coastal Floodings

Also, a longer term perspective is informative:

post-glacial_sea_level
The table below shows the distribution of Sea Ice across the Arctic Regions, on average, this year and 2020.

Region 2022166 Day 166 Average 2022-Ave. 2020166 2022-2020
 (0) Northern_Hemisphere 10788609 10854645  -66036  10425585 363024 
 (1) Beaufort_Sea 1054571 964886  89685  1005355 49216 
 (2) Chukchi_Sea 799723 796983  2740  775535 24188 
 (3) East_Siberian_Sea 1059777 1050162  9615  1013223 46554 
 (4) Laptev_Sea 686049 773271  -87221  782244 -96194 
 (5) Kara_Sea 712542 715202  -2659  513253 199289 
 (6) Barents_Sea 79046 206557  -127511  164943 -85896 
 (7) Greenland_Sea 539319 566915  -27596  578130 -38812 
 (8) Baffin_Bay_Gulf_of_St._Lawrence 799919 706060  93859  592090 207829 
 (9) Canadian_Archipelago 838798 795875  42923  792582 46215 
 (10) Hudson_Bay 957895 986396  -28501  937993 19902 
 (11) Central_Arctic 3216668 3220647  -3979  3231087 -14419 

The main deficits are in Laptev and Barents Seas, mostly offset by surpluses in Beaufort, Baffin and Canadian Archipelago.

 

 

 

Europe’s Alps: From White to Green and Back Again

The usual suspects (BBC, Science Focus, Phys.org, The Independent, Metro UK, etc.) are worried that green spaces are visible from space, and snow cover will continue to retreat, with bad consequences for the Alpine eco-system, unless we stop burning fossil fuels.  This is triggered by a new paper by Sabine Rumpf et al. From white to green: Snow cover loss and increased vegetation productivity in the European Alps.  Excerpts from Science Focus in italics with my bolds.

Snow in the European Alps is melting and invasive plant species are outcompeting native Alpine plants, satellite imagery has shown. Both findings will reinforce climate change, say scientists.

The changes noticed in a new study, which uses satellite data from 1984 to 2021, show that as much as 77 per cent of the Alps has experienced greening, where areas with previously low vegetation have suddenly seen a boom in plant growth.

While the new plants do take a small amount of carbon out of the atmosphere by photosynthesis, scientists say the greening has a much bigger negative effect on climate change, as less of the Sun’s light will be reflected away from the Earth meaning the planet will get warmer.

The Alps are expected to see a reduction in snow mass of up to 25 per cent in the next 10-30 years, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s 2019 report. As the snow melts, there will be more rock falls and landslides, which could have devastating consequences.

The new study shows that the Alps is experiencing snow cover recession that can already be seen from space, which the authors warn will only get worse as time goes on.

In the changing mountain environments, native Alpine plants have suffered while new species have thrived. This is because the plants specialised to higher elevations have had to focus on long-term living in the Alps, sacrificing the characteristics that could make them more competitive in the short term.

However, over time Alpine Temperatures and Snow are variable in quasi-cycles

For example, consider Change in temperature for the Greater Alpine Region, 1760–2007: Single years and 20-year smoothed mean series from the European Environment Agency (EEA)

Yes there are warming and cooling periods, and a rise recently.  However, summer minus winter half-years have declined the last century.  Calendar year averages peaked in 1994.  So the certainty about present conditions “only getting worse” is founded on faith rather than facts.

Then consider the record of snow cover over a longer period than the last thirty years.  Rutgers Snow Lab provides this graph:

So a lot of decadal variation is evident.  While 2020-21 snow extent is down from a peak in 2016, it was lower in 2007, and very much lower in 1988-1990.  True, the last 30 years had generally less snow than 30 years prior to 1990. But who is to say that the next 30 won’t see a return to earlier levels, still with large decadal fluxes.

And a longer term view of Alpine glaciers, shows how much climate change has gone on without the benefit of CO2 from humans.

Summer Temperatures (May – September) A rise in temperature during a warming period will result in a glacier losing more surface area or completely vanishing. This can happen very rapidly in only a few years or over a longer period of time. If temperatures drop during a cooling period and summer temperatures are too low, glaciers will begin to grow and advance with each season. This can happen very rapidly or over a longer period in time. Special thanks to Prof. em. Christian Schlüchter / (Quartärgeologie, Umweltgeologie) Universität Bern Institut für Geologie His work is on the Western Alps and was so kind to help Raymond make this graphic as correct as possible.

Summary

The combination of mild warming and higher CO2 has greatly benefited the biosphere globally, resulting in setting crop yield records nearly every year.  It should not be surprising that Europe’s Alps participated in this greening of the land.  But I object to the notion that humans caused it or can stop it by reducing emissions.  We do not control the climate or weather, and both warming and cooling periods will come and go as they always have.

 

Climate Dissonance: Ocean Warming or Cooling?

Climatists are manifesting cognitive dissonance, or maybe factional conflict.  They simultaneously claim the ocean current warming the North Atlantic is slowing down bringing colder weather, while also claiming the increasing ocean heat content is warming the ocean faster than ever.  The cooling alarm was noted and rebutted in a recent No Tricks Zone article 3 New Studies Show Atlantic Tipping Point Unrealistic…”Muted Response”…”Changes To Be Viewed With Caution”.

My own critique of the alarm was this post: The Cooling Also Not Our Fault

Turning Attention from the Freezing to the Overheating Ocean

The Ocean Heat scare was included in the recent UN Climate report, alongside four other claims I rebutted in the post UN False Alarms from Key Climate Indicators.The Ocean Heat Content is more complex, requiring this post of its own. The key message was this:

Ocean heat was record high. The upper 2000m depth of the ocean continued to warm in 2021 and it is expected that it will continue to warm in the future – a change which is irreversible on centennial to millennial time scales. All data sets agree that ocean warming rates show a particularly strong increase in the past two decades. The warmth is penetrating to ever deeper levels. Much of the ocean experienced at least one ‘strong’ marine heatwave at some point in 2021.

Figure 4. 1960–2021 ensemble mean time series and ensemble standard deviation (2 standard deviations, shaded) of global OHC anomalies relative to the 2005–2017 average for the 0–300 m (grey), 0–700 m (blue), 0–2 000 m (yellow) and 700–2 000 m (green) depth layers. The ensemble mean is an update of the outcome of a concerted international data and analysis effort.

Context and Background Information

Media alarms are rampant relying mostly on a publication Record-Setting Ocean Warmth Continued in 2019 in Advances in Atmospheric Sciences
Authors: Lijing Cheng, John Abraham, Jiang Zhu, Kevin E. Trenberth, John Fasullo, Tim Boyer, Ricardo Locarnini, Bin Zhang, Fujiang Yu, Liying Wan, Xingrong Chen, Xiangzhou Song, Yulong Liu, Michael E. Mann.

Reasons for doubting the paper and its claims go well beyond the listing of so many names, including several of the usual suspects. No, this publication is tarnished by its implausible provenance. It rests upon and repeats analytical mistakes that have been pointed out, but true believers carry on without batting an eye.

It started with Resplandy et al in 2018 who became an overnight sensation with their paper Quantification of ocean heat uptake from changes in atmospheric O2 and CO2 composition in Nature October 2018, leading to media reports of extreme ocean heating. Nic Lewis published a series of articles at his own site and at Climate Etc. in November 2018, leading to the paper being withdrawn and eventually retracted. Those authors acknowledged the errors and did the honorable thing at the time, resulting the paper’s retraction 25 September 2019.

Then a revised version of the paper was published 27 December 2019 with the same title and stands today.  The 2019 abstract is exactly the same as the 2018 abstract (retracted), except for one sentence.

♦  2018:  We show that the ocean gained 1.33 ± 0.20 × 10^22 joules of heat per year between 1991 and 2016, equivalent to a planetary energy imbalance of 0.83 ± 0.11 watts per square metre of Earth’s surface.

♦  2019:  We show that the ocean gained 1.29 ± 0.79 × 10^22 Joules of heat per year between 1991 and 2016, equivalent to a planetary energy imbalance of 0.80 ± 0.49 W watts per square metre of Earth’s surface.

Figure 1. Argo float operation. There are about 3,500 floats in the ocean, and a total of ~10,000 floats have been used over the period of operation.

In the discussion and graphs, readers should note that 1 Zettajoule (ZJ) = 1 x 10^21 joules, and that these are energy units, not temperatures. Willis Eschenbach did a fine analysis of this OHC issue, since it depends mostly upon ARGO float measurements. From that essay:

The first thing that I wanted to do was to look at the data using more familiar units. I mean, nobody knows what 10^22 joules means in the top two kilometres of the ocean. So I converted the data from joules to degrees C. The conversion is that it takes 4 joules to heat a gram of seawater by 1°C (or 4 megajoules per tonne per degree). The other information needed is that there are 0.65 billion cubic kilometres of ocean above 2,000 metres of depth, and that seawater weighs about 1.033 tonnes per cubic metre.

The first thing is to note that 3500 floats are sampling 0.65 billion cubic km of the ocean, and the record began in 2005. The next thing is to appreciate the impact of increasing energy upon the ocean temperature.

Yes, those are ocean warming increments of a few 1/100ths of a degree kelvin.  Applying the math to Resplandy et al., we should also note the ranges of uncertainty in these estimates (ocean temps to 1/100 of a degree, really?)

Resplandy 2018: Claim 103 to 153 ZJ/decade, or warming between 0.03 to 0.05 C/decade.

Resplandy 2019:  Claim  50 to 208 ZJ/decade, or warming between 0.02 to 0.07 c/decade

And the Climate Show Goes On

Benny Peiser of GWPF objected in writing to IPCC, saying inter alia:

Your report (SROCC, p. 5-14) concludes that
” The rate of heat uptake in the upper ocean (0-700m) is very likely higher in the 1993-2017 (or .2005-2017) period compared with the 1969-1993 period (see Table 5.1).”

We would like to point out that this conclusion is based to a significant degree on a paper
by Cheng et al. (2019) which itself relies on a flawed estimate by Resplandy et al. (2018).
An authors’ correction to this paper and its ocean heat uptake (OHU) estimate was under
review for nearly a year, but in the end Nature requested that the paper be retracted
(Retraction Note, 2019).

That was not the only objection. Nic Lewis examined Cheng et al. 2019 and found it wanting. That discussion is also at Climate Etc. Is ocean warming accelerating faster than thought? The authors replied to Lewis’ critique but did not refute or correct the identified errors.

Now in 2022 the same people have processed another year of data in the same manner and then proclaim the same result. The only differences are the addition of several high profile alarmists and the subtraction of Resplandy et al. from the References.  It looks like the group is emulating MIchael Mann’s blueprint:  The Show Must Go On.  The Noble cause justifies any and all means.

Show no weaknesses, admit no mistakes, correct nothing, sue if you have to.

Footnote: Q: Is the Ocean Warming or Cooling?  A: Nobody Knows.

To enlarge, open image in new tab.

 

 

 

May 31 Arctic Ocean Frozen Solid

The animation shows Arctic ice extents on day 151 (end of May) from 2006 to yesterday 2022. It is evident that typically there are some regional seas starting to melt by this date, whereas 2022 remains frozen solid.  More detailed analysis is below, but note the 2022 surplus is 600k km2, or 5% above the 16 year average for day 151.  That extra ice extent amounts to 0.6 Wadhams, or 6826 Manhattan Islands, whichever index you prefer.  The graph below shows May 2022 daily ice extents compared to the 16-year average and some other years of note.

The black line shows during May on average Arctic ice extents decline ~1.8M km2 down to 11.7M km2.  The 2022 cyan MASIE line only lost 1.3M km2, starting the month 141k km2 above average and on day 151 showed a surplus of  598k km2.  The Sea Ice Index in orange (SII from NOAA) starter lower than MASIE, then ran over in later weeks, ending May nearly the same. The dark green line is average Arctic ice, excluding Bering and Okhotsk (B&O), which started melting early in 2022. The light green line is 2022 without B&O.  As of day 151, the 2022 B&O extent matches the average B&O, so the ~600k km2 surplus is entirely in the core Arctic ocean.

Why is this important?  All the claims of global climate emergency depend on dangerously higher temperatures, lower sea ice, and rising sea levels.  The lack of additional warming is documented in a post Adios, Global Warming

The lack of acceleration in sea levels along coastlines has been discussed also.  See USCS Warnings of Coastal Flooding

Also, a longer term perspective is informative:

post-glacial_sea_levelThe table below shows the distribution of Sea Ice on day 151 across the Arctic Regions, on average, this year and 2020.

Region 2022151 Day 151 Average 2022-Ave. 2021151 2022-2021
 (0) Northern_Hemisphere 12281289 11682840 598449 11605537 675752
 (1) Beaufort_Sea 1060171 1003588 56582 1034779 25392
 (2) Chukchi_Sea 894077 865036 29040 900868 -6792
 (3) East_Siberian_Sea 1085478 1064424 21054 1051959 33520
 (4) Laptev_Sea 877340 824419 52921 738294 139047
 (5) Kara_Sea 870898 829705 41193 824068 46831
 (6) Barents_Sea 421071 305918 115153 325745 95326
 (7) Greenland_Sea 665639 562229 103411 615174 50465
 (8) Baffin_Bay_Gulf_of_St._Lawrence 976116 897470 78647 812548 163568
 (9) Canadian_Archipelago 854703 810848 43855 811040 43663
 (10) Hudson_Bay 1122388 1088994 33395 1084892 37496
 (11) Central_Arctic 3245183 3216568 28615 3232324 12859
 (12) Bering_Sea 116552 115657 895 89124 27428
 (13) Baltic_Sea 915 199 717 0 915
 (14) Sea_of_Okhotsk 89260 96309 -7049 83572 5688

The overall surplus to average is 598k km2, (5%).  The surplus is found in every region, except for a slight deficit in Okhotsk

bathymetric_map_arctic_ocean

Illustration by Eleanor Lutz shows Earth’s seasonal climate changes. If played in full screen, the four corners present views from top, bottom and sides. It is a visual representation of scientific datasets measuring Arctic ice extents.

May 8 Arctic Ice A-OK

My previous Arctic ice report was limited by technical difficulties, now resolved as shown by the animation above.  So this update comes a week into May, with the animation covering the last three weeks from mid April.   The dramatic melting in the Pacific basins of Bering and Okhotsk (left) sets them apart from the rest of Arctic sea ice. As noted before, those two basins are outside the Arctic circle, have no polar bears and are the first places to become open water in the Spring. Elsewhere sea ice persisted, actually growing in Barents and Greenland seas.

[The staff at National Ice Center were extremely helpful, as usual.  Their work is distinctive, valuable and deserving of your appreciation.  See Support MASIE Arctic Ice Dataset]

The melting effect on NH total ice extents during this period is presented in the graph below.

The graph above shows ice extent mid-April through May 7 comparing 2022 MASIE reports with the 16-year average, other recent years and with SII.  2022 ice extents have tracked the average, going surplus for the last 10 days. .Both 2021 and 2007 are well below average, on day 127 lower than 2022 by 318k km2 and 443k km2 respectively. The two green lines at the bottom show average and 2022 extents when Bering and Okhotsk ice are excluded.  On this basis 2022 Arctic ice was nearly 400k km2 in surplus on May 7, and prior to yesterday, the horizontal line shows little loss of ice extent elsewhere than in the Pacific.

Region 2022127 Day 127 Average 2022-Ave. 2007127 2022-2007
 (0) Northern_Hemisphere 13272388 13096082  176306  12954671 317717 
 (1) Beaufort_Sea 1053640 1059642  -6001  1056022 -2382 
 (2) Chukchi_Sea 959821 949409  10412  955497 4324 
 (3) East_Siberian_Sea 1087137 1085912  1225  1081248 5889 
 (4) Laptev_Sea 897845 892770  5075  870216 27628 
 (5) Kara_Sea 928813 897443  31370  883059 45754 
 (6) Barents_Sea 642899 476820  166079  430155 212745 
 (7) Greenland_Sea 732835 616488  116347  639861 92974 
 (8) Baffin_Bay_Gulf_of_St._Lawrence 1185073 1140285  44787  1076913 108159 
 (9) Canadian_Archipelago 854685 845807  8879  845091 9594 
 (10) Hudson_Bay 1216867 1212411  4456  1192270 24597 
 (11) Central_Arctic 3248013 3223344  24669  3241053 6960 
 (12) Bering_Sea 275935 401584 -125649  398914 -122980 
 (13) Baltic_Sea 14465 13264  1201  10416 4050 
 (14) Sea_of_Okhotsk 172221 278245  -106023  269684 -97463 

The only deficits to average are in Bering and Okhotsk, more than offset by surpluses everywhere else, especially in Barents and Greenland seas, along with Kara and Baffin Bay.  At this point, overall NH sea ice is 88% of last March maximum (15.1M kim2).  All regions are well above 90% of their maxes, except for Barents (81%), Baffin Bay (66%), Bering (33%) and Okhotsk (20%).

 

April 1st Footnote:

It has been a long hard winter, requiring overtime efforts by Norwegian icebreakers like this one:

In addition, cold Spring temperatures led to unusual sightings of Northern creatures:

Not only Polar bears are flourishing!