Ocean Circulation

The ocean moderates the Earth's climate due to its vast capacity to store and transport heat; the influence of the large-scale ocean circulation on changes in climate is considered in this chapter. The ocean experiences both buoyancy forcing (through heating/cooling and evaporation/precipitation) and wind forcing. Almost all ocean forcing occurs at the surface, but these changes are communicated throughout the entire depth of the ocean through the meridional overturning circulation (MOC). In a few localized regions, water become sufficiently dense to penetrate thousands of meters deep, where it spreads, providing a continuous source of deep dense water to the entire ocean. Dense water returns to the surface and thus closes the MOC, either through density modification due to diapycnal mixing or by upwelling along sloping isopycnals across the Southern Ocean. Determination of the relative contributions of these two processes in the MOC remains an active area of research. Observations obtained primarily from isotopic compositions in ocean sediments provide substantial evidence that the structure of the MOC has changed significantly in the past. Indeed, large and abrupt changes to the Earth's climate during the past 120,000 years can be linked to either a reorganization or a complete collapse of the MOC. Two of the more dramatic instances of abrupt change include Dansgaard-Oeschger events, abrupt warmings that could exceed 10°C over a period as short as a few decades, and Heinrich events, which are associated with massive freshwater fluxes due to rapid iceberg discharges into the North Atlantic. Numerical models of varying complexity that have captured these abrupt transitions all underscore that the MOC is a highly nonlinear system with feedback loops, multiple equilibria, and hysteresis effects. Prediction of future abrupt shifts in the MOC or “tipping points” remains uncertain. However, the inferred behavior of the MOC during glacial climates suggests that significant modifications to the present circulation are possible and that any change is likely to have a large effect on the Earth's climate

Record monthly-temperature extremes

Póster presentado en: VIII Congreso de la Asociación Española de Climatología celebrado en Salamanca entre el 25 y el 28 de septiembre de 2012

Comparing climate projections to observations up to 2011

We analyse global temperature and sea-level data for the past few decades and compare them to projections published in the third and fourth assessment reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The results show that global temperature continues to increase in good agreement with the best estimates of the IPCC, especially if we account for the effects of short-term variability due to the El Niño/Southern Oscillation, volcanic activity and solar variability. The rate of sea-level rise of the past few decades, on the other hand, is greater than projected by the IPCC models. This suggests that IPCC sea-level projections for the future may also be biased low

Global temperature evolution: Recent trends and some pitfalls

Global surface temperatures continue to rise. In most surface temperature data sets, the years 2014, 2015 and again 2016 set new global heat records since the start of regular measurements. Never before have three record years occurred in a row. We show that this recent streak of record heat does not in itself provide statistical evidence for an acceleration of global warming, nor was it preceded by a 'slowdown period' with a significantly reduced rate of warming. Rather, the data are fully consistent with a steady global warming trend since the 1970s, superimposed with random, stationary, short-term variability. All recent variations in short-term trends are well within what was to be expected, based on the observed warming trend and the observed variability from the 1970s up to the year 2000. We discuss some pitfalls of statistical analysis of global temperatures which have led to incorrect claims of an unexpected or significant warming slowdown

Change points of global temperature

We aim to address the question of whether or not there is a significant recent 'hiatus', 'pause' or 'slowdown' of global temperature rise. Using a statistical technique known as change point (CP) analysis we identify the changes in four global temperature records and estimate the rates of temperature rise before and after these changes occur. For each record the results indicate that three CPs are enough to accurately capture the variability in the data with no evidence of any detectable change in the global warming trend since ∼1970. We conclude that the term 'hiatus' or 'pause' cannot be statistically justified

Global mean sea-level rise in a world agreed upon in Paris

Although the 2015 Paris Agreement seeks to hold global average temperature to 'well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels', projections of global mean sea-level (GMSL) rise commonly focus on scenarios in which there is a high probability that warming exceeds 1.5 °C. Using a semi-empirical model, we project GMSL changes between now and 2150 CE under a suite of temperature scenarios that satisfy the Paris Agreement temperature targets. The projected magnitude and rate of GMSL rise varies among these low emissions scenarios. Stabilizing temperature at 1.5 °C instead of 2 °C above preindustrial reduces GMSL in 2150 CE by 17 cm (90% credible interval: 14–21 cm) and reduces peak rates of rise by 1.9 mm yr−1 (90% credible interval: 1.4–2.6 mm yr−1). Delaying the year of peak temperature has little long-term influence on GMSL, but does reduce the maximum rate of rise. Stabilizing at 2 °C in 2080 CE rather than 2030 CE reduces the peak rate by 2.7 mm yr−1 (90% credible interval: 2.0–4.0 mm yr−1)

Reply to Comment on "Cosmic rays, carbon dioxide, and climate"

In our analysis [Rahmstorf et al., 2004], we arrived at two main conclusions: the data of Shaviv and Veizer [2003] do not show a significant correlation of cosmic ray flux (CRF) and climate, and the authors' estimate of climate sensitivity to CO2 based on a simple regression analysis is questionable. After careful consideration of Shaviv and Veizer's comment, we want to uphold and reaffirm these conclusions. Concerning the question of correlation, we pointed out that a correlation arose only after several adjustments to the data, including shifting one of the four CRF peaks and stretching the time scale. To calculate statistical significance, we first need to compute the number of independent data points in the CRF and temperature curves being correlated, accounting for their autocorrelation. A standard estimate [Quenouille, 1952] of the number of effective data points is urn:x-wiley:00963941:media:eost14930:eost14930-math-0001 where N is the total number of data points and r1, r2 are the autocorrelations of the two series. For the curves of Shaviv and Veizer [2003], the result is NEFF = 4.8. This is consistent with the fact that these are smooth curves with four humps, and with the fact that for CRF the position of the four peaks is determined by four spiral arm crossings or four meteorite clusters, respectively; that is, by four independent data points. The number of points that enter the calculation of statistical significance of a linear correlation is (NEFF− 2), since any curves based on only two points show perfect correlation; at least three independent points are needed for a meaningful result

Three years to safeguard our climate

Christiana Figueres and colleagues set out a six-point plan for turning the tide of the world's carbon dioxide by 2020

Author Correction: Estimating global mean sea-level rise and its uncertainties by 2100 and 2300 from an expert survey

Correction to: NPJ Climate and Atmospheric Science https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-020-0121-5, published online 08 May 202