NASA GISS Shows November 2013 Hottest On Record. Mangled Jet Stream Brings 4-8 C Above Average Temps to Russia, Arctic.

November 2013 Temperature Anomaly

(Global Temperature Anomaly November 2013. Image source: NASA)

The temperature records just keep on falling. Despite a somewhat cooler than average fall and early winter for most of the US, the world continued an inexorable warming trend by shattering a previous record high global average temperature for the month of November. According to NASA GISS, November 2013 was the hottest since record keeping began in 1880. At .77 degrees Celsius above the 1951-1980 average, November 2013 was .02 degrees Celsius hotter than November of 2010, the previous hottest November.

Almost all regions of the globe showed hotter than average temperatures. The two exceptions were West Antarctica and adjacent ocean regions and central and eastern North America. Temperatures in these regions ranged from .5 to 4.1 degrees Celsius below normal. The hottest regions of the world included Antarctica, the Pacific Ocean south of Alaska and Alaska, and a large swath including Russia and the adjacent Arctic regions. The Antarctic hot patch ranged from 1 to 4 degrees Celsius above normal and covered most of the continent. Large regions of Alaska and adjacent Pacific and Arctic Ocean environs also ranged from .5 to 4 degrees Celsius above average.

But the hottest zone included a massive section of Russia and the adjacent Arctic Ocean. There, a persistent high amplitude ridge in the Jet Stream drove much warmer than average temperatures far into the north, forcing temperatures into a range of 4-8 degrees Celsius above average over a massive region and driving a wedge of heat all the way to the North Pole. According to Dr. Jennifer Francis and Dr. Jeff Masters, such high amplitude Jet Stream waves are both primary drivers of extreme weather and a direct result of massive losses of sea ice occurring since 2007.

November 2013 Prime Example of Polar Amplification

More rapid warming at the poles, or polar amplification, has been implicated in an observed slowing of the Jet Stream that has become more and more pronounced in recent years, resulting in both record heat waves and droughts as well extreme rain events. Observed temperatures showed a classic and pronounced amplification at the poles with northern hemisphere showing the most pronounced amplification. It is worth noting that the southern hemisphere is not expected to amplify as rapidly as the southern ocean acts as an enormous heat sink.

Zonal temperatures

(Zonal Temperature Anomalies for November 2013. Image source: NASA)

Observed CO2 and methane readings during the period were also very high over the Arctic and Northern Russia with numerous spikes in the range of 1900 to 2200 ppb methane and CO2 levels rising above 400 ppm for much of the Arctic region by late November. Though likely contributing to Arctic amplification, these values alone were not enough to account for the very high temperatures observed in Russia during the period which, as noted above, coincided with a ridge blocking pattern in the northern hemisphere Jet Stream. Anomalous heat in Alaska also coincided with a powerful ridge that has persisted over the region for much of this year.

These record hot conditions are exceptional, especially when one considers that ENSO remains in a neutral state. Such conditions do not bode well for the next El Nino year, when it does emerge.

Links:

NASA GISS

Methane Tracker

Hat Tip to Colorado Bob

Leave a comment

87 Comments

  1. The Arctic and Antarctic are above normal, and Siberia is roasting. Here comes the methane!

    Reply
    • Looks that way. Archer and Schmidt are going to have to redefine those models pretty soon.

      Reply
    • james cole

       /  December 16, 2013

      These were my thoughts exactly. The big temperature anomaly sits right over the giant tundra methane machine, needed only to be awoken by a good long application of heat. This must now be serious, I remember 20 years ago reading about Soviet Era Siberian apartment complexes beginning to collapse due to the concrete pilings set in permafrost that had begun to melt. If that was happening two decades ago, what must be the state of vast areas of tundra now?!
      I seriously believe the arctic area has gone through the first real climate flip this century. The positive feed backs are now enormous and look unstoppable. Look how fast the sea ice decline came! It was so fast that no scientist seemed to have a clue it was about to collapse. The next couple years should tell the story as all kinds of feed backs are now underway. Best advice to stay calm is tune into FOX news, They will call it all a lie, and then we can relax.

      Reply
      • Yes. FOX = the opium of the ignorant.

        There’s so much carbon coming out of the freezer up there that’s it’s difficult to make a case against some degree of emissions increase. We really need to get a quantitative handle on emission rates (yearly).

        That said, with the Arctic already producing very large volumes of both methane and CO2, it’s pretty clear that there’s a significant additional GHG feedback in play. And, as noted above, I can’t see how this contribution wouldn’t continue to grow. There’s just so much additional heat in play. The system is one undergoing radical change.

        As for ESAS methane. One wonders how much additional stress major summer storms will deliver to the sea bed. With the sea so shallow, and with the ice effectively gone, the currents and motion are bound to deliver much more energy than previously experienced during the Holocene. As the decades progress and if the .7 C temp increase per decade for this region continues, the already visible stresses we see now will only amplify. Not looking forward to observing the draw of this region within two to three decades time.

        Reply
  2. Hey Rob,

    Hope you are doing alright. I am back in India. looking for jobs in sustainability. Applying for PhD next year. Many companies in India are cutting their environmental staff/funding. I approached few companies. But they said they are not hiring due to economic slow down. In fact, they said, “we are cutting funding for sustainability department. Why waste money if economy is not growing”…..Phew…..

    My parents are also not happy that I did a degree in the field that does not have any value. People in India haven’t heard about sustainability actually. Very few are even aware of global warming. This also does not bode well.

    ~Sourabh

    Reply
    • Being downrange of a rapidly melting Himalayan glacial system and next door to a growing refugee state (Bangladesh) while not being aware of climate change certainly does not bode well. Your parents should applaud your vision and conscience. In my view, without sustainability, there is no viable future.

      I hope you’re doing well despite all the adversity, Sourabh. Warmest regards to you.

      Reply
  3. Gerald Spezio

     /  December 15, 2013

    The evidence is empirical & question is simple; how long do we have – until we roast & suffocate?

    Most people don’t have CLUE, & happily motor on.

    Reply
    • It’s a question of inertia, the pace of human forcing, and the strength of feedbacks. I’m not as pessimistic as some but more pessimistic than most. Nature is not forgiving to rapid insults and what we’ve done appears to be unprecedented.

      Reply
  4. Robert,

    Thanks for drawing attention to the GISS Temp anomaly report for this month, the longer term views of YTD and the Fall 2013 reports provide a similar pattern.

    One correction may be needed in your last sentence, Did you mean to say “El Nino” vs “ENSO”?

    Regards,

    A4R

    Reply
    • Good catch! Had scrambled to write this last night so surprised it was as clean as it ended up. Added source attribution and a hat tip to Colorado Bob as well.
      Looks like 2013 will be 6th hottest on record in the average.

      Reply
  5. Gerald Spezio

     /  December 15, 2013

    Some perverse blessings – even lawyers & robed lawyer/judges will roast.

    Harvard & Yale law schools empty.

    Courthouses abandoned.

    Lawsuits ended completely.

    Reply
  6. Tom

     /  December 15, 2013

    Gerald:

    As well as medicine, dentistry, electricity and whata-ya-know we have 100’s of more Fukushimas!

    Reply
  7. lanikk

     /  December 15, 2013

    Gerald and Tom, Any thoughts on whether or not there are any places that will be sustainable for a bit longer? Lots of writing on what is happening. Very little if any on which places are likely to be less impacted. Maybe no one knows? PS I’m with you Gerald on the perverse blessings….

    Reply
    • Higher elevations and higher latitudes, generally. The Himalayan plateau will probably be one of the best land island regions during any severe event.

      My opinion is that, without rapid mitigation, it will be very, very tough to manage, regardless of location. There is risk of an extreme pace of change. And even with such mitigation we probably have rather major Earth changes in store.

      Reply
    • Gerald Spezio

       /  December 15, 2013

      Guy McPherson wisely suggests that we live our lives as though we are already in hospice.

      I am trying to do just that w/o doing too much more damage.

      I feel powerless & despairing.

      I think that it is our best & only option.

      I don’t think that our comeuppance, suffering, & ultimate oblivion will be other than abrupt & soon.

      Reply
      • lanikk

         /  December 15, 2013

        Hmmm. Himalayan plateau. Interesting. Any others?
        In the meantime, Guy McPherson is probably right on. Though I struggle with the idea of my grandson in hospice with me and will continue to look for a cure/lifeboat for his sake.

        Reply
  8. Lanikk — had posted some others on the previous post. For North America, The region of Upstate New York through Vermont and New Hampshire to non-coastal Maine look like one of the more resilient ones. Non coastal British Columbia (sea level rise will be mitigated by a rising continent there) will also tend to be a more resilient region.

    I’ll consider putting together a comprehensive post on the regions that appear to be more resilient to climate change. I’m somewhat reticent because I tend to feel that migration and adaptation will fall short long-term and would push more for as much mitigation and prevention as possible.

    If you are in New Mexico, you’re in the middle of an expanding drought zone, if the primary climate models are to be believed. Conditions in the middle and later portion of this century will probably be very bad RE water stress and loss of livable lands to deserts. So it is not a resilient region.

    Reply
    • lanikk

       /  December 15, 2013

      Would love to see such a post. Don’t think there is much danger at this point of migration as things still look too ‘normal’ and there is a human bias towards the maintaining status quo. The bias will work in favor of both mitigation and prevention ~ as the perception will be that it is ‘easier’ somehow than pulling up stakes and starting over.

      Reply
    • lanikk

       /  December 16, 2013

      Thank you for your research Robert! Will look forward to reading it. Kind Regards, Lannie

      Reply
  9. Tom

     /  December 16, 2013

    lanikk, Robert: this question of “safe areas” will be extremely hard to determine since things are changing so rapidly. With all the methane and hydrogen sulfide blowing in off the dying oceans, radiation falling from the sky in rain and snow (soaking into the ground and being absorbed by crops), diseases on the rise for which there are no cures, inability to grow food due to weather aberrations, wild swings in temperature, flooding rain and/or drought, etc. on top of the collapse of civilization, the electrical grid and aging infrastructure make such predictions mere guesswork.

    Reply
    • There are some parameters for which you can determine ‘safer’ and ‘less safe.’ But, overall, you’re correct, a world in which the worst case climate scenarios are realized is far ‘less safe’ overall (a caveat I’d include in any article I’d write on the subject).

      We’d also have to consider how bad our future scenario would be. Should we pick a worst case scenario or a middle case? I think that should be defined from the outset. I’m leaning toward a middle-bad definition where there is some response (some climate mitigation, some shutting down nuke plants etc, some geoengineering [with varying unintended consequences], some retention of civilization for a relatively extended period, a slower [multiple decades to centuries timescale] but ongoing transition toward a stratified/Canfield ocean, and a middle road methane release scenario in the range of an eventual 100 to 500 megaton per year from the Arctic with total feedbacks double the initial human forcing).

      In an absolute worst case, there would still be a few regions that would prove more resilient. But the other factors (externalities of political conflict, mass migration, starvation, disease, war, and vagary of horrors RE advanced civilization collapse) would probably make these zones highly contested hell-holes.

      For Lanikk, I’ll probably be looking at the former scenario with caveats for the latter… An interesting project to be certain. One I may as well book-end with a second project that takes into account which zones currently appear to be most at risk.

      And just this one afterthought…

      Why should Lanikk and grandchildren be disadvantaged to those who are capable of doing this kind of research on their own? If the end result (through failure to govern, neglect, greed or terrible cynicism) is abandonment of civilization and those like Lanikk along with it, to pull up the stakes, as it were, then why should Lanikk be disadvantaged to the elite few with the resources to determine these answers if/when crisis arises?

      Reply
      • lanikk

         /  December 16, 2013

        Thank you for hitting the nail on the head!

        Reply
      • lanikk

         /  December 31, 2013

        Wondering if you are working on my question about where to go for a better chance at a bit longer security?

        Reply
  10. Someone on Neven’s Arctic Sea Ice asked about why different data sets show different results , that is the UK’s Hadley Centre doesn’t match say NOAA’s data set. Well here’s the reason :
    ” A new study by British and Canadian researchers shows that the global temperature rise of the past 15 years has been greatly underestimated. The reason is the data gaps in the weather station network, especially in the Arctic. If you fill these data gaps using satellite measurements, the warming trend is more than doubled in the widely used HadCRUT4 data, and the much-discussed “warming pause” has virtually disappeared.

    “There are no permanent weather stations in the Arctic Ocean, the place on Earth that has been warming fastest,” as New Scientist explained five years ago. “The UK’s Hadley Centre record simply excludes this area, whereas the NASA version assumes its surface temperature is the same as that of the nearest land-based stations.”

    As I’ve discussed many times, that’s why we know with high certainty that the planet has actually warmed up more in the past decade than reported by the global temperature records, especially the Hadley Center’s. ”

    http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/12/15/3065961/faux-pause-warmest-november-nasa/

    Reply
    • Yep. The big gap in Arctic data is coming back to bite everyone. We need to drive the Republicans out of Congress so that we can actually have a hope of dealing with this crisis (one, they ideologically believe that government can’t do anything and so they endlessly sabotage its ability to act effectively and two, they’re still living in candy puff land where climate change doesn’t happen and, if it does, it can’t be caused by humans).

      We need an Arctic early warning system as well as complete and comprehensive monitoring. The current funding levels, given the actual risk, are unconscionable. And yes, as noted in the Climate Progress article, the ‘pause’ is mostly fake, an artifact of climate change denial and a mainstream media that is living in an alternate universe…

      If I had a dollar for every talking head I’ve seen saying ‘and we don’t have to worry about methane anymore…’ I’d be able to buy a nice plot in BC for Lanikk and family. Anyone not concerned about methane and related Arctic feedbacks is, as above, living in an alternate universe.

      Reply
      • Anyone not concerned about methane and related Arctic feedbacks is, as above, living in an alternate universe.

        Deep-Sea Corals Record Dramatic Long-Term Shift in Pacific Ocean Ecosystem

        The extent of the change is dramatic: a 17 to 27 percent increase in nitrogen-fixation since about 1850, after almost a millennium of relatively minor fluctuations. “In comparison to other transitions in the paleoceanographic record, it’s gigantic,” Sherwood said. “It’s comparable to the change observed at the transition between the Pleistocene and Holocene Epochs, except that it happens an order of magnitude faster.”

        http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/12/131215160902.htm

        Reply
  11. East Antarctica Is Sliding Sideways: Ice Loss On West Antarctica Affecting Mantle Flow Below

    Dec. 11, 2013 — It’s official: East Antarctica is pushing West Antarctica around.

    Now that West Antarctica is losing weight–that is, billions of tons of ice per year–its softer mantle rock is being nudged westward by the harder mantle beneath East Antarctica.

    The discovery comes from researchers led by The Ohio State University, who have recorded GPS measurements that show West Antarctic bedrock is being pushed sideways at rates up to about twelve millimeters–about half an inch–per year. This movement is important for understanding current ice loss on the continent, and predicting future ice loss.

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/12/131211132449.htm

    Reply
  12. Steve

     /  December 16, 2013

    It seems to me like average temperatures may not be quite as informative as they have in the past. It seems like it is now common to have a lot of days that are 10 degrees F above or below the average temperature over the course of even a month. The cold swings average things out a bit and makes it looks like things are much closer to normal than what they actually are. It would be interesting to see how many days we average now that are 5 degrees above or below normal compared to 30 years ago.

    Reply
    • Hansen shows increasing temperature extremes coincide with increasing heat. That said, the cold extremes don’t tend to reach the same lows as before. The winter we’re seeing in the US isn’t the worst on record. But there are many regions that are experiencing hottest ever temperatures.

      Reply
      • Steve

         /  December 16, 2013

        I don’t think I was clear with what I am trying to say or ask. Let me use precipitation to make it clearer. I’m concerned that things are worse than what it appears. For example, in Chicago we were on track to have the wettest year ever through June. Then the next four months, I believe we were 80% down in precipitation. So now, over the course of the year, it looks like we had a just slightly wetter than normal year. The numbers don’t show any reason for concern. But in reality, I can’t imagine that 6 months of numerous flooding events, followed by 4 months of desert like conditions didn’t wreak havoc on the environment and animals.
        It seems like a lot of scientists get caught up in the measureables and are fixated on the fact we’ve only increased the worldwide temp by .8. I’m afraid we can’t quantify it and therefore steer towards things that can be. There are so many things that we can see coming, but what aren’t we seeing? With all the studying that you do, how concerned are you that we can’t anticipate something really bad that hasn’t been observed/acknowledged yet?

        Reply
      • Very concerned.

        But your meteorologist is doing a very bad job if he doesn’t mention the fact that the first half of this year was the wettest on record and the second half of this year was nearly the driest. And, you’re right, this likely has some rather extreme impacts on wildlife and natural resources.

        We have probably missed a good number of things. And there are a few issues outside the norm that I and others track that aren’t on the larger radar, so to speak. Disease, for example, could be horribly brutal. But we really don’t have very many means to track new vectors based on heat other than through traditional observations. We don’t, for example, know which of the billions of microbes might become more virulent at a given temperature threshold or a given environmental extreme.

        If you really want to scare yourself, read one of the articles about starfish turning to goo that Bob posts periodically…

        Reply
      • Steve

         /  December 16, 2013

        Oh I have! I don’t miss much from your blog. Your writing and excellent commenters make this an incrediblly enlightening site.

        I don’t think anything will scare me as much as when Rex Tillerson acknowledged man made climate change. Sure he tried to downplay it a bit, but he acknowleged it. My first thought was “things are getting ready to hit the fan!” I can’t come up with a reason in the world for him to have said that, other than him being smart enough to know heads are going to roll when it(whatever that equates to) hits. He then would use this as a hopeful get out of jail free ticket. I don’t think he would have said that if he didn’t know the long warned about fallout is getting uncomfortably close.

        Your report today about the government allowing their ice free possibility expectations in the Arctic in 2016 being publicly available isn’t far behind.

        Reply
  13. Steve

     /  December 16, 2013

    I unfornuately present exhibit #112 that provides evidence that the world is nowhere near ready to make even small changes in business as usual standards that are destroying our planet. Are they obtuse? Is it deliberate?

    Reply
    • I am thinking that the dollar signs are what blinds people to the terrible reality. That and human resistance to change. Happens again and again throughout history. Did the people of Pompeii leave when the mountain began making angry noises? Some did. Those that stayed now bear witness to our extraordinary ability to ignore loud and obvious warnings.

      Reply
  14. Steve

     /  December 16, 2013

    There’s nothing to see here. Move along! http://www.cnbc.com/id/101276275 This isn’t a political party problem, this is a power and greed problem!

    Reply
    • Well, when one party serves as the easily manipulated lap dog of the powerful and greedy… Who brought us the wonderful ‘greed is good’ endlessly parroted throughout the 90s and early 2000s?? Who brought us deregulation and the monetary collapse that followed. Who serves the Koch brothers with such obvious adoration? Who keeps the stupid fest going at every climate and energy cabinet meeting? Who fights to cut funding for climate disaster victims?

      Yes, I’ll agree to a number of more stupid ones on the other side as well. And that getting rid of republicans isn’t a panacea solution to all problems. But I think we’d be much better off without the primary cheerleaders of said greed (80% of the republican party). The boatload of ignoramuses who continuously get in the way of anything that would actually have a potential to help matters.

      Reply
      • Steve

         /  December 16, 2013

        Under a democratic presidency and a democratic Senate damaging explorations have markedly increased. Money will buy the necessary votes. If Republicans are replaced by Democrats I doubt if anything will change. Yes, Democrats talk with concern much more than Republicans, but if votes are needed, enough of them will be bought. If the Democrats collectively cared about what is being done to our planet, things would be much different than what they are. Making this a political issue has almost guaranteed that nothing will be done to change things.

        Reply
        • lanikk

           /  December 16, 2013

          I agree Steve. Politics is a side show intended to entertain the masses. Just finished reading an article about the money machine ramping up behind Clinton and her $200K speaking engagements for bankers meetings.

        • I think I’m going to support Biden in the primaries.

          Let’s see on a scale of 1 to 10 with 1 being terrible and 10 being perfect I’d rank Hillary a 5 to 6 (more good than bad, but still enough bad to be discouraging), Biden a 6-7 and anything republicans put out a 1 or a 2.

        • Under democrats we got increased CAFE standards, the EPA acting to regulate carbon, major funding pushes for renewables that would have gone through if they weren’t obstructed each and every year by republicans, and the largest decrease in fossil fuel emissions in modern memory brought on the back of major cut-backs in coal use.

          It’s highly cynical to blame oil and gas company action on democrats who tend to be, at worst, luke-warm fossil fuel supporters (aside from the coal democrats of west VA).

          Keystone XL would be done now if Republicans were in office. There’d be a federal mandate for fracking taking away local state and city choice in the matter. The EPA would be gone or understaffed underfunded and effectively useless. We’d be competing with China for the worst air quality.

          No, saying democrats are the same is a false equivalency. Are they as good as they need to be? No. But they are sure as hell a far cry better than republicans.

      • Steve

         /  December 16, 2013

        Maybe you’re right Robert. I just don’t have any confidence in any high ranking politician anymore. I lost any trust I had in the current administration with how quickly they gave the green light to eating fish from the Gulf after the big spill and all the chemicals that through in on top of it. I’ve seen fracking explode in this country with seeing no action to stop it.

        Think about all the people who post and attack anybody on internet sites that mention global warming. I can’t believe all these people are acting without any financial incentive behind it. I’m afraid the same has already been done with our policticians. The R or D behind their name is just a game. That are just getting paid to advance their backers wishes.

        There is a reason Keystone hasn’t gone through yet and I don’t think it is out of concern for the environment.

        Reply
      • The donkey will kick me in the back, bite me when I’m not looking, and keep me awake at night with its obnoxious braying. But it will carry my stuff for me and, more slowly than I’d like, take me in the direction I need to go. The elephant will sit on me and crush me until I’m dead. Do I like the donkey? No. But it still has its uses. The elephant has sworn itself to be an enemy to all I stand for and so is anethema.

        You’re right. There are a hundred things Obama didn’t do and could have done and should have done. And there are many things he did that probably resulted in a degree of harm. But there are 50 things he did that I like that the republicans would never, ever in my wildest dreams have done. And so, though one is disappointing, the other is just flat terrible.

        And, yes, you’re right about the polluting influence of money. But it was right wing ideology that got us that via our lovely Citizens United and ongoing deregulation of everything that keeps us safe from abuse. (Just track ALEC feeds to republican legislation and Chamber of Commerce donations to Republicans vs Democrats to get an idea where things are heading).

        Reply
      • lanikk

         /  December 16, 2013

        Sanders is looking good to me. Wishing E Warren would run.

        Reply
  15. Steve

     /  December 16, 2013

    Also over the weekend, it snowed in Cairo Egypt for the first time in 112 years. Big storm hit the middle east. I believe somewhere near Jerusalem got hit with 20 inches of snow. The link I checked was really slow, so google it if you’re interested in seeing some reports. If you don’t want to be irritated, don’t read comments after the news though. Virtually all of them take this as proof that global warming is a hoax.

    Reply
    • Mangled Jet Stream brings snow to Middle East, Above Freezing temps to Finland in December.

      Here you have a classic high amplitude Jet Stream wave resulting in a cut off cold core upper level low with associated pool of cut-off cold air while much warmer air invades further north. It’s not refutation of global warming, just more proof that Francis’s assessments of impacts due to loss of sea ice are correct.

      Yet more false assertions of global warming ‘hoaxes’ motivated by the oil fueled right wing…

      The real question to ask these idiots is: ‘are these the coldest ever temperatures for Egypt or Jerusalem?’ And ‘Why was the global average temperature for November the hottest ever if Global Warming is a hoax?

      Reply
    • Aqua/MODIS
      2013/350
      12/16/2013
      11:10 UTC
      Snow in the Middle East

      Reply
    • Steve –

      About that record cold number from Antarctica :

      A single day measurement in a bowl on top of the Transantarctic Mountains some of which rise 14,800 ft above sea level.

      Meanwhile at the South Pole station >


      Another month at the South Pole. Another month of record high temperatures at the bottom of the world.

      The 2013 winter – the months of June, July and August – will already go down as the warmest such season at the South Pole since records began in 1957. That trend continued into September – now the warmest on record – with four new daily maximum record temperatures falling in the middle of the month.

      “Saying that it has been a warm winter this year is a bit of an understatement at this point,” said Phillip Marzette, senior meteorologist at the South Pole Station .

      “http://antarcticsun.usap.gov/science/contenthandler.cfm?id=2911

      Reply
  16. David Goldstein

     /  December 17, 2013

    Regarding the comments about more resilient climate zones…I just finished a screenplay for what I am hoping will be Hollywood’s first blockbuster climate change movie. (Day After Tomorrow VERY excepted!) It is 2072 and, in a now 4C warmer world, humanity is on the eve of a massive geoengineering intervention in the form of upper atmosphere sulfate injections. Much of the world is dramatically altered due to flood, drought, sea level rise, etc., however my base community is placed in still relatively stable non-coastal British Columbia. Robert if you have time and are interested, I’d love to send you a draft. I’m also a climate writer on Huffington Post. My most recent article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/davidgoldstein/the-insanity-of-climate-c_b_4393750.html

    Reply
    • For public review or editorial comment?

      I’d be delighted to see your draft and wish you the best on the success of your project. Certainly a timely and much needed one. I am hoping for something with more verisimilitude and resonance than DAT.

      Please contact me at mithorden@yahoo.com

      Warmest regards to you,

      –R

      Reply
  17. jyyh

     /  December 17, 2013

    November positive anomaly was 34-36th largest (divided) in the GISS record if I checked this correctly. all the larger positive anomalies have happened since Feb-1998. 133*12 +11 = 1607 months in record.The last times GISS anomaly was negative was Sept-1992, Sept-1986 and Mar-1982. the last time when GISS had a continuous negative or positive anomaly like the current 251 month stretch was from Aug-1883 to Mar-1906 if one counts in the couple of zero anomalies. The current positive anomaly still doesn’t beat this early long anomaly in duration or in the maximum values or in the total anomaly, so there are still some records to break. I haven’t estimated when that would happen, but it might be an interesting exercise.

    Reply
  18. Steve

     /  December 17, 2013

    Thanks Bob! I hadn’t read anything about the extremely warm summer experienced at the South Pole. We are having a really cold start to the winter here in Chicago. The last two Dec/Jan here have been much warmer than normal with very little snow. This year we have been 10-15 degrees below normal for the last three plus weeks and are over double the average in snowfall. All I hear are people mocking any mention of climate change.

    Reply
    • lanikk

       /  December 17, 2013

      Well, when the snow never goes away, Chicago shuts down, and they can’t get out the door…maybe they will wonder why it is different from the no snow years?

      Reply
      • Steve

         /  December 17, 2013

        I don’t get it lanikk. I’m guessing the people/media in Chicago aren’t much different than most places in the U.S.. The weather here is far more often abnormal than normal. We’ve seen a lot over the last few years. March 2012, we had 8 straight days in the low to mid 80’s when averages were around 50. We had a long hot summer and an exceptional drought. Wettest Jan-June on record this year. I believe we’ve had less snow the last years than what Arkansas received.

        Reply
      • Steve

         /  December 17, 2013

        We had an F5 tornado in November two hours south of Chicago that wiped out most of a small town. When it does storm we often see 60-70 mph straight line winds roll in with it. We had our wettest day ever by far last summer when parts of Chicago go 10 inches of RAIN. People around here for the most part think nothing of it two weeks after said event and have very little interest or concern. I don’t get it!

        Reply
      • They’re in the trough extreme of a high amplitude Jet Stream wave. Winter means more snow. Summer heavier rain events.

        When the weather pattern switches, they end up with drought, heat. It would be a lot easier to talk about climate change if folks were actually having to live in the climate. Pretty much everything is climate controlled these days, so individuals rely on media/weather reports for perception.

        In the regions where extreme events result in disruption, loss of homes etc, these individuals tend to be more receptive to the issue of increasing extreme weather, because it amplified to the point that it directly affected them in an extreme manner.

        Reply
  19. Steve

     /  December 17, 2013

    Glad to see our government doesn’t want to do anything to slow down drilling or charge these companies more money. Sarah Palin get a government position that escaped the media’s attention? Drill Baby Drill! http://news.yahoo.com/u-drops-royalty-hike-plan-drilling-taxpayers-hit-164808264–business.html It’s only a billion dollars! Who needs that?

    Reply
  20. Steve

     /  December 17, 2013

    Forgot important insert of Dec/Jan when comparing Chicago snow to Arkansas. Our February snow totals have helped things look closer to normal when looking at annual total.

    Reply
  21. According to Roshydromet, Russia observed its warmest November since national records began in 1891.
    http://meteorf.ru/press/news/5114/

    Reply
    • Quite a bit of heat in that region during November. Seems to have at least partly extended through December.

      Working on ocean stratification article RE the report you cited yesterday. Hope to have it finished by this evening.

      Reply
        • Good article. Though it does sound a bit familiar😉 the author should also take a look at ‘Under a Green Sky,’

          Getting an inordinate amount of climate change denier spam today. Good thing I feel no obligation to let fools or idiots post nonsense here…

      • Steve

         /  December 17, 2013

        CB: I need a drink after reading that. Russia’s temperatures skyrocketing at the same time of a huge increase in methane numbers in that area is interesting to say the least. RS: I am glad that you leave their thoughts out. I’d rather listen to a bunch of drunks at a baseball game sharing their thoughts on life.

        Reply
        • It’s worth noting that increased methane levels + increased CO2 levels in the region amount to about +15 ppm CO2 equivalent forcing. This is enough to drive local temps higher by about .6 C (average) if the air in the region is static and doesn’t exchange heat with other zones and, here’s the kicker, if there’s zero inertia holding the temperature down. This rough estimate does not account for the total amplification in the region (which would include loss of albedo and a number of other factors), but does make up a substantial portion of it.

          The extraordinary high temperatures for this time were also related to a powerful ridge in the Jet Stream and displacement of cold air southward on the other side of the world, primarily over North America.

          This is not to diminish the role of methane, just to put it into context of the overall pattern. IF we see much higher methane levels due to polar amplification over time, the extremes we see now will seem minor by comparison.

  22. Steve

     /  December 17, 2013

    I can’t find the original story that highlighted White’s comments from the National Research Council’s report, but after confidently stating that the concern for an immediate massive methane release was insignificant he went on to say/predict that the worst effects will probably be non-linear and we will be blindsided by them. Based on how conservative his other comments from this report were, it was pretty alarming. http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=18373
    So now when I see things taking place so fast, I can’t help but think “what are we not seeing?” I realize a massive outburst of methane itself isn’t going to cause a major temp fluctuation. But what could it effect that could? For Russia to exceed normal temperatures by that much in November is fascinating to me.

    Reply
    • The Arctic is probably emitting around 50 megatons of methane in total (of which we have roughly measured 35 megatons). This is a very large emission equal to about 8% of the global total. But it is not currently enough to overwhelm the human forcing. It simply adds to the trouble we’ve created.

      But with 3000 gigatons (approx) of methane laying around in the tundra and under the permafrost, the current emission is just the tip of the iceberg.

      IF, for example, we had a yearly methane emission of 1 gigaton, it would triple the human ghg forcing of 1 year for up to 20 years and it would double that single year’s global warming potential for an entire century.

      IF, for example, we had a catastrophic 50 gigaton emission over the course of a year or a decade, we would increase the world’s methane burden by an order of magnitude (x10) and we would effectively multiply by 8 the TOTAL human forcing since 1880 over 20 years and effectively double that forcing over the course of a century.

      The events, as they currently stand, have an effect in that that portionally add to current human warming. Any major release would greatly add to human warming. Any catastrophic release would potentially result in .6 to 1.4 C or more temperature increase PER DECADE.

      In such an event, methane would be in the drivers seat. And that is a pass we most certainly do not want to come to.

      We’re not there yet. What we see is bad — global feedbacks via methane and CO2 emission adding to the human total. But a large release could be much, much worse.

      Reply
  23. Steve

     /  December 17, 2013

    If it were spring/summer/early fall, I wouldn’t be as troubled. But November? And after their summer of hot temps and massive fires and massive flooding. China’s air quality has been horrid a lot over the last month also. They also had a late brutal summer with heat and flooding. I realize it could all be coincidental, but that’s an awful lot of never seen before events for this part of the world over a very short period of time.

    Reply
    • You are absolutely right about that. And, this is probably not helpful, but we are probably somewhat under-reporting methane totals in surface zones…

      Reply
  24. Heat wave in Argentina collapses power grid: thousands with no energy or water

    People out in the streets banging pots and pans, or protesting burning tires and garbage containers in powerless neighborhoods, while an estimated 30.000 businesses in Buenos Aires City and metropolitan area are organizing demanding compensation for losses suffered because of the collapse of the power distribution system overwhelmed by an extraordinary heat wave with temperatures in the high thirties and low forties.
    http://en.mercopress.com/2013/12/18/heat-wave-in-argentina-collapses-power-grid-thousands-with-no-energy-or-water

    Reply
  25. SAN FRANCISCO — The ancients had ample reason to view comets as harbingers of doom, it would appear.

    A piece of the famous Halley’s comet likely slammed into Earth in A.D. 536, blasting so much dust into the atmosphere that the planet cooled considerably, a new study suggests. This dramatic climate shift is linked to drought and famine around the world, which may have made humanity more susceptible to “Justinian’s plague” in A.D. 541-542 — the first recorded emergence of the Black Death in Europe.
    http://www.livescience.com/42048-halleys-comet-linked-to-ancient-famine.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Livesciencecom+(LiveScience.com+Science+Headline+Feed)

    Reply
  26. Steve

     /  December 18, 2013

    This made me think of Jurassic Park… https://www.google.com/#q=sochi+weathher+conditions
    “Hello? You are going to have dinosaurs on the dinosaur tour? Hello?”
    “Hello? You are going to have snow at the WINTER OLYMPICS? Hello?”
    I feel bad for the athletes that have trained so hard for most of their lives for this moment, but if this weather continues in Sochi, it sure beats a horrible storm as an attention getter for people to see how our weather is changing dramatically and quickly!

    Reply
  27. Steve

     /  December 18, 2013

    Did a little more research into Sochi. Elevation obviously comes into play, but the long range forecast has to cause issues even at higher altitudes. Accuweather showed average high for Sochi of 36 and it gets lower later in the month. Their long range forecast is predicting a high of 60 on 12/26 and a high of 61 on 12/29. There weren’t any days forecasted to be any less than 11 degrees F above average. Most highs over next couple weeks are in the 50’s. That’s two months straight of MUCH higher than average temps. I bet climate change is an easy sell in Russia. I remember seeing pictures over the summer of people at the beach in Siberia. Good stuff! For those who didn’t get flooded or nearly choke to death from fires, I bet they are really liking the effects of PLAN CARBON!

    Reply
    • Ah yes, good old plan Carbon. And the same fools are drooling over the prospect of drilling in the Arctic.

      Those are some amazingly hot readings. Good work on the research. Maybe we’ll see another record hot or near record hot month for December, at least in the NASA measure. Very large pool of heat still over much of the Northern Hemisphere and related polar region.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: