Record Hot Atlantic Basin to Fuel Brutish 2016 Hurricanes?

Last week, Gulf of Mexico sea surface temperatures off Tampa Bay were outrageously hot. On July 10, the ocean temperature measure hit 93 degrees Fahrenheit (34 Celsius). By the 11th, temperatures had warmed still more. And by the 12th, ocean surfaces had hit a sweltering 95 F (35 C).

Tampa bay water temperatures

(NOAA shows extreme sea surface temperatures at Old Port in Tampa, FL. Hat tip to Michael Lowry.)

It’s pretty rare that you see ocean waters anywhere on Earth become so hot. And when you do, it’s often in places like the Red Sea or the Persian Gulf — not the Gulf of Mexico. But in the new world driven to increasingly extreme warmth by human fossil fuel emissions, the potential heat bleeding off of ocean surfaces has jumped by quite a bit.

And it’s not just true with Tampa Bay. According to Michael Lowry, a hurricane specialist at The Weather Channel, the whole of the Gulf of Mexico recorded its hottest average daily July sea surface temperature this month at 86.3 F (30.1 C).

Atlantic Basin Sees Record July Heat

The record ocean heat extends still further. National Hurricane Center storm specialist Eric Blake earlier today noted that, for July, the entire Atlantic Basin west of longitude 60° W is the hottest it’s ever been during any hurricane season, including the record storm year that was 2005. In other words, a huge zone of ocean stretching from the far eastern edge of the Caribbean, encompassing all of the Gulf of Mexico and running up the entire eastern seaboard of the US and on to just east of Bermuda is now seeing the hottest July ocean temperatures experienced in our modern records.

Record Hot Atlantic Basin Sea Surface Temperatures

(Sea surface temperatures hit record ranges for the western North Atlantic during recent days. CDAS image via Eric Blake.)

Overall ocean surface temperatures range from 0.5 to 1 C above average for the Caribbean, 0.5 to 2.5 C above average for the Gulf of Mexico and 1 to 6 C above average for the coastal US Atlantic. These temperatures compare to an already hotter-than-normal 1981-to-2010 average, so departures from the 20th-century average would be even greater.

Record Ocean Heat to Strengthen 2016 Atlantic Hurricanes?

Hot ocean temperatures are fuel for the powerful storms we call hurricanes. But it’s not the only ingredient. Low-pressure formation at the surface, a lift in the atmosphere, high pressure aloft, widely available moisture, and a lack of wind shear are all atmospheric assists that aid in storm formation. So far during July, a dearth of these other factors has resulted in no storms as of yet for the month.

2016, however, has already seen four named tropical storms — including the odd winter Hurricane Alex and three tropical storms which spun up during June. And given the extreme ocean surface heat in the Northwestern Atlantic, some agencies are beginning to call for the potential for more and possibly powerful storms on the way.

According to The Weather Network:

The main driving elements for hurricane formation in the Atlantic are the SST values present in the Atlantic itself, the predicted wind shear conditions in the region, and the SST pattern found in the Pacific related to the timing of the transition from El Niño to La Niña in the equatorial Pacific Ocean. Model predictions anticipate that the second part of this 2016 season will be more active as La Niña intensifies in the Pacific and becomes one of the main drivers of activity for the Atlantic.

As a result of the combined extreme Atlantic Basin heat and the predicted emergence of La Niña conditions in the equatorial Pacific, some hurricane monitors are upping the number of storms predicted for 2016. Colorado State is now forecasting 15 named storms as opposed to its earlier 13. However, its prediction for the number of major hurricanes has remained the same at two, with one affecting the US.

Predicted tropical wave

(Models predict what appears to be a very healthy tropical wave emerging off the west coast of Africa by July 28. If a tropical cyclone results that tracks into record warm western Atlantic waters, peak storm intensity near the US could be quite extreme. Hat tip to meteorologist Ryan Maue for the ECMWF infrared forecast capture.)

However, predicted warm-water formation in the Pacific off Mexico could dampen Atlantic storms by pushing in more dry air and developing a higher degree of wind shear than is typical during a La Niña year. In addition, large African dust flows currently over the tropical Atlantic also may tend to suppress storm formation.

Given the ambiguous conditions noted above, the situation still appears to be a bit of a crapshoot. That said, those extreme sea surface temperatures near the US will likely continue to ramp up through August. And that’s a situation that creates a potential where storms approaching the US rapidly intensify as they hit those record-hot waters. Overall, it’s a pretty dicey environment for forecasters and one that has been wagged in no small amount by conditions related to human-forced warming.

Links/Attribution/Statements

NOAA

National Hurricane Center

ECMWF

The Weather Network

Michael Lowry

Ryan Maue

Eric Blake

Hat tip to DT Lange

Leave a comment

78 Comments

  1. Reply
  2. – Mashable:

    ‘The climate that most of us grew up with is gone for good’

    On Tuesday, two government science agencies announced that the first six months of 2016 were the warmest first half of any year on record.

    The data confirms what climate scientists have been startled to see during the past several years — the Earth’s climate has made a step jump into a new, hotter era with more intense and frequent extreme events.

    One way to look at the recent climate trends is to take the past 60 years of temperature data and break them into 20-year periods.

    The changes in the average temperature anomaly during these periods helps to show what a step jump the climate has made during most of our lifetimes.

    Reply
    • Josh

       /  July 21, 2016

      In my opinion this graph does itself no favours by showing the period below average, as it makes it look as though the current warm period could be just a counter to the previous cool period.

      Of course as we know here, this is just an artifact of the period used for the average. But I think for someone coming to this without a picture on their head of what came before this graph, it could downplay the long term trend.

      Ive seen versions of this graph dotted around news sources recently. Not sure what anyone else thinks?

      Reply
      • Looking at the graph:

        Note the 20th century average — the sold black line.

        And the increase of the average deviations in the blocked 20 yr frames — from 0.01 C to 0.27 C to 0.61 C.

        As Robert pointed out — the ominously steep upticks of 2014-16.

        Also, those 20 yr cycles should be looked as human generations of fossil fueled conduct and decision making. (Nothing to be proud of here.) All coincide with the mass acceptance of car/truck/plane/mechanized farming culture. Each generation had deadly episodes of fossil fuel air/atmospheric pollution known to be the result of the above. Each generation is/was supposedly better educated and informed than the preceding one.

        Each 20 yr cycle has economies boosted and sustained by fossil fuel use and extraction.

        I’m not sure what to make of the uptick during the World War II years — or the relative ‘cool down’ afterwards. This could be significant.

        These are some things I noticed.

        Reply
    • Just insane. It’s worth noting that this spike will drop off by a bit as temperature moderate somewhat due to La Nina, but this three year 2014, 2015, 2016 spike is absolutely huge.

      Reply
  3. I am in awe of RS’s excellence writing, editing, and speed of posting.

    However, he has a tough sell on his hands to convince me that CO2 is not partitioning from the warmer ocean water into the atmosphere.

    Reply
    • Added heat does reduce the ocean’s capacity to act as a carbon sink. We’ve been pretty clear on that since jump. There isn’t too much in the way of exact science that determines whether or not this is happening to a measurable increasing degree at this time. But with the warmer oceans, already loaded with carbon, it’s just a matter of time before the signal of a degraded carbon sink starts to show up.

      Regardless, the human carbon emission at 13 billion tons per year is the primary driver of it all. Everything else is feedback.

      Reply
  4. Reply
  5. Griffin

     /  July 21, 2016

    Hi Robert. I am wondering if you or anyone else has any thoughts on the impact of the prolific amount of smoke in Africa with regards to thunderstorm development?
    I realize that the bulk of the smoke is from fires located in Angola, Congo and Gabon and that this is south of the area where thunderstorms roll off the continent to form tropical wave, but the sheer volume of smoke has me wondering if there is not some impact (positive or negative) on thunderstorm development in the region.

    Reply
    • That’s quite a lot of cloud condensation nuclei. But considering the amount of dust coming off Africa, it appears that its been pretty dry.

      Reply
    • OK, looking at storm formation over the past 7 days, it appears that storms are firing pretty well to the south of the 15 N Latitude line. Those that do get up that far fizzle pretty quick in the dry air. The storms that are holding together are ranging at around 10 N and these are feeding into a decent ITCZ. Overall, it seems to me that these storms are a bit small when compared to the 90s or 2000s. Even comparing 2012 to 2016, you can visibly see the green line creeping south indicating less rainfall over sections closer to 13-15 N.

      Reply
  6. Colorado Bob

     /  July 21, 2016

    A new complex of fires in the Russian far East –

    Terra/MODIS
    2016/202
    07/20/2016
    01:40 UTC

    Reply
  7. Jay M

     /  July 21, 2016

    Big dry circulation pattern over mid west clouds being thrown out by system to edges?

    Reply
  8. Colorado Bob

     /  July 21, 2016

    The fires are burning right next to beaches on the Arctic ocean –

    Aqua/MODIS
    2016/202
    07/20/2016
    06:55 UTC

    The roof of the world is on fire.

    Reply
  9. Andy_in_SD

     /  July 21, 2016

    This appears to be the next significant stair step up, as had occurred after the 97 El Nino.

    However at that time the ocean did not have the same concentration of CO2 and heat. I am beginning to view the 97 event as a “last chance” situation which has passed.

    At this juncture the ocean is simply barfing up some of the heat is has accumulated. We’re done.

    Reply
    • labmonkey2

       /  July 21, 2016

      I was contemplating a similar scenario after reading this latest article. I can only imagine the excess heat will also foster additional algal blooms and contribute even more to the ‘death-spiral’ we are currently witnessing.
      Trying to inject a modicum of humor, I have coined the eventual release of ocean captured carbon as the FFF or “Fossil Fuel Fart” – in keeping with current naming conventions.

      as an aside- my local Santee temp was 104.3 yesterday with an RH of ~20%. Tolerable, but still had the AC cranking.

      Reply
    • We’re definitely getting into the era of dangerous climate change. +1.2 C v 1880s probable for this year. That’s +1 C vs Holocene average probably +0.5 C vs Holocene peak and a range that was more typical to the warmer periods of the Eemian.

      Reply
  10. Greg

     /  July 21, 2016

    First, I just have to say that Robert has nothing to do with the Ad on the blog but the new Trump one rocks. You are sucking his money down the drain for us! Just awesome. Huge.

    Reply
  11. Andy_in_SD

     /  July 21, 2016

    Open note for Lurkers.
    =================

    I know there are lurkers, folks who are driving by, and lurker folks who are leaning in the denial position, or simply puzzled, curious.

    For all of those people, I ask you to look at the data, look at the year over year satellite images. If you are inclined to not believe what Robert writes, then please apply the same skepticism to ALL of your internet sources, and do your own investigative research. The data is out there, all you have to do is pull up excel and do an @sum or @average or whatever.

    And this applies to you in the media, don’t puke up talking points. Do some work, look at the numbers and do your chosen vocation an honor. Simply shitting out sound bites for click bait is whoring. Call yourself a journalist / investigator? Well, be one.

    Don’t have excel? Use open office, it’s free and does the same thing.

    I implore that you look at the data, information, and finally (most importantly) allow the numbers to speak without your personal bias trying to bend the results.

    Numbers and physics don’t care about Al Gore, Don Trump, Hillary, Emails, RNC, DNC, Kock, Scribbler, Me, You or anything we are wrapped up in. The laws of physics don’t give a shit about you or I.

    Look into CO2 research from the 1800 on wards, long before Al Gore, You, Me, the UN, IPCC, Heartland or any of that. All you need is a calculator or a spread sheet.

    Then when you see WTF is real, and you are seeing what is truly going on, then and only then factor in the rate of change and it’s implications on life and ecosystems. Their ability to adapt, speed of adaption. Plants, animals, fish, plankton etc…

    Compare the 2. I leave the rest to you to draw your conclusion. I already know the shock you will experience, as do many folks.

    So, for the denial lurkers, please, please, please. Stop reading anything from anyone (pro/con). Do your own research, investigate, go beyond the one dimensional CO2 is plant food and such nonsense. Carry that down the whole path. Learn what high concentrations of CO2 do to plants (not good). Stop reading ANYTHING from WWUT, here or anywhere in the media. Investigate and learn.

    If you can not stop having others provide you with an opinion, then you do not deserve one.

    I am asking this so you know what you are discussing in such a manner that others look upon you with respect.

    And most importantly, after the number spoke, and if you have a predetermined outcome that says “ignore the numbers and the laws of physics” (pro/con) then you do not deserve a seat at the table with the adults. If you think the oceans will eat Miami next week -or- the email scandal goes back to Faraday’s time, you do not deserve to sit with the adults.

    Learn, research, get the data and work it, view annual satellite imagery. Look at solar output (hint, we should be cooling many years ago), all of your fall backs, all of the points you refute. Investigate them.

    Some of us know where that rabbit hole goes, we want you to be one of those in the know as well.

    I have deliberately NOT added any links to any data. It is upon you to do your research (you know, lift a f’n finger), I will NOT skew it. Nor should any media, WWUT or any other biased source feed you their “chosen” data. It is upon you to grab it, grind some numbers and come to your realization.

    Please. Even if you don’t care about you, your country or species, at least for your kids. Maybe you give a shit about them?

    Reply
    • Colorado Bob

       /  July 21, 2016

      The laws of physics don’t give a shit about you or I.

      The laws of physics don’t even care if you understand the laws physics.

      Nice job Andy.

      Reply
      • Andy_in_SD

         /  July 21, 2016

        I wish I could edit my post and insert this, CB. It is 100%.
        Thanks,
        Andy

        The laws of physics don’t even care if you understand the laws physics.

        Reply
    • Griffin

       /  July 21, 2016

      As a follow up for the lurking journalists out there that may not have had the pleasure of having a history of reading Andy’s past comments:
      For years Andy has provided us with level-headed, thoughtful and accurate comments on the wide-ranging impacts of fossil fuel emissions. His words carry the wisdom of a man who looks down the road and knows what is coming based on his knowledge of the past.

      Thanks for saying this Andy, cause we know that they read the comments and sure do get information from the tremendous posts on this blog. I wish they would tell the truth for what our situation really is. It is a full blown emergency. It is as much of an emergency as a supertanker with a head of steam a quarter mile from a shoal. And yes, the laws of physics don’t care if you have a clue, the damn ice just melts.

      Reply
    • Cate

       /  July 21, 2016

      Well said, Andy. This needs to be shared, shared, shared.

      If you put it on FB (assuming you’re on FB), it would be really easy to share—–just a thought?

      Reply
    • Well said, my friend.

      Reply
  12. Colorado Bob

     /  July 21, 2016

    They’re discussing SLR at Dr. Roods . With that new graph showing the latest jump . The 2012 drop in the graph made me think of this This is why sea level rise dropped in 2012 –

    Reply
  13. Colorado Bob

     /  July 21, 2016

    The world races so fast now. I had planned to die 28 years ago , with a perfectly lovely corpse. And “Fun, Fun, Fun” played at the funeral. Not to follow this grim butchers work with numb feet, and a heavy heart. One thing I have learned, despair is a very short trip to a dead end. And humans have never just sat down and let themselves be eaten by cave bears.

    Reply
    • We’ve got to do something. And it would help a great deal if we got those republicans out. Never a more self destructive political party in the history of the US. Probably in the history of time.

      Reply
  14. – Via climatehawk1:

    – FYI – Ice – A discussion of various types

    ‘Cold and calculating: what the two different types of ice do to sea levels’

    It was back in 250ʙⅽ when Archimedes reportedly stepped into his bathtub and had the world’s first Eureka moment – realising that putting himself in the water made its level rise.

    More than two millennia later, the comments sections of news stories still routinely reveal confusion about how this same thing happens when polar ice melts and sea levels change.

    What is happening to land ice?

    The two great ice sheets are in Greenland and Antarctica. Thanks to satellite measurements, we now know that since the early 1990s both have been contributing to sea-level rise…

    What about sea ice?

    Over the last four decades of satellite measurements, there has been a rapid decrease and thinning of summer Arctic sea ice. This is due to human activity warming the atmosphere and ocean…
    https://theconversation.com/cold-and-calculating-what-the-two-different-types-of-ice-do-to-sea-levels-59996

    Reply
  15. Colorado Bob

     /  July 21, 2016

    The Russian fires grow everyday.

    I submit that we start “The roof on the world is on fire ”

    Every day in every way drive this story. Link it, show it. spread it.

    The tundra is on fire in Russia . That;s bad. Very very bad.

    Reply
  16. Colorado Bob

     /  July 21, 2016

    Every day in every way drive this story. Link it, show it. spread it

    Do it.

    Reply
  17. – Sorry Bob. Twitter made me do it🙂

    Reply
    • Greg

       /  July 21, 2016

      While you are at it:

      Reply
      • Greg

         /  July 21, 2016

        Reply
      • Greg, the link is a NO GO. ‘REJECTION DEBUG: unknown request’

        Reply
      • But the tundra is on fire.

        Reply
      • Greg

         /  July 21, 2016

        DT, CB has a lock on music to walk the line btwn despair and celebrating life. I’ve only got a few visuals and a little sarcasm. Yes, the attic/roof is on fire. No 911 to call. 2:12 A.M EST. Need Sleep. Out.

        Reply
    • – I was curious what a Twitter search would bring up for ‘tundra fire’ — this is the first result.
      Plenty more about ‘Tundra’ car racing team or some such FF crap.
      Maybe two were about the tundra fires now burning.

      Reply
    • So I just got this image of people running around the Arctic with aerosol spray cans trying to stop wildfires. Given the size of these things, I think that would be a decent analogy to any firefighting effort. Although, as many here have noted, the Russians just let these far northern fires burn. And so we have worsening fires under fire managed forests and worsening fires under forests that aren’t managed. The point being that fires are getting worse everywhere due global warming.

      Reply
      • ‘…worsening fires under fire managed forests and worsening fires under forests that aren’t managed. ‘🙂

        Reply
  18. – The other day I looked out my window to see three (3) swallows plying the air.
    Looking above me I spotted twenty (20) or so contrails filling the sky.
    I should have seen thirty (30) to a hundred (100) swallows — and zero (0) carbon/water contrails.

    – Almost daily, in PNW/PDX, clear skies turn cloudy white when airliners fill the sky.
    It is an ugly and unsettling sight.
    Efforts are underway to understand their impacts.

    -nesdis.noaa.gov/news_archives/do_conrails_effect_conditions_on_the_surface.

    ‘Do Contrails Effect Conditions on the Surface?’

    Penn State Researchers Use NOAA Satellite Data in Attempt to Find Out

    – Contrails, or “condensation trails” are ice crystal clouds formed by the combination of carbon particles and water vapor emitted from planes and naturally occurring atmospheric water vapor.

    Reply
  19. – A reminder, with a reminder that unhealthy ozone levels will likely accompany this heat.

    Reply
    • – Will have to see how far north the heat will extend.
      – And as Robert has said – moisture/precip. at the edges.
      – And maybe a ring of warm/moist ice softening air around that?

      Reply
    • So the farm belt is going to bake. Great…

      Reply
  20. redskylite

     /  July 21, 2016

    More new phenomena reported from Siberia, what next ?

    Trembling tundra – the latest weird phenomenon in Siberia’s land of craters

    Earth is moving as ‘leaking methane gas due to global warming causes surface to bubble’ in a new phenomenon.

    This extraordinary sight – in a video filmed of the tundra on remote Belyy Island in the Kara Sea off the Yamal Peninsula coastline – was witnessed by a scientific research expedition. Researchers Alexander Sokolov and Dorothee Ehrich spotted 15 patches of trembling or bubbling grass-covered ground.

    When punctured they emitted methane and carbon dioxide, according to measurements, although so far no details have been given. The reason is as yet unclear, but one possible explanation of the phenomenon is abnormal heat that caused permafrost to thaw, releasing gases.

    Alexander Sokolov said that this summer is unusually hot on the Arctic island, a sign of which is polar bears moving from the frozen sea to the island.

    http://siberiantimes.com/ecology/others/news/n0679-trembling-tundra-the-latest-weird-phenomenon-in-siberias-land-of-craters/

    Reply
  21. June

     /  July 21, 2016

    Words fail me. I can’t even rant about it.

    Sections of Great Barrier Reef suffering from ‘complete ecosystem collapse

    Coral Watch investigator reports ‘shocking’ lack of fish and says the surviving corals are continuing to bleach, even during winter.

    “The lack of fish was the most shocking thing,” said Justin Marshall, of the University of Queensland and the chief investigator of citizen science program Coral Watch. “In broad terms, I was seeing a lot less than 50% of what was there [before the bleaching]. Some species I wasn’t seeing at all.”

    Without many of those fish, Marshall said the coral would face a harder time recovering, since the entire ecosystem had been degraded

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/21/sections-of-great-barrier-reef-suffering-from-complete-ecosystem-collapse?CMP=twt_a-environment_b-gdneco

    Reply
    • June

       /  July 21, 2016

      I did like the way they framed the cause at the end of the article. That global warming brought the SST close to the maximum threshold corals could stand and El Niño provided a bump that pushed it over that threshold. I wish scientists and MSM would use this phrase instead of implying that it is just st el niño.

      Reply
    • Spike

       /  July 21, 2016

      Agreed – we’re banging our heads when we jump because the floors a lot higher.

      Reply
    • 😦

      Apparently this global bleaching event is now ongoing since 2014. It’s likely that the coolest months we’ll see this year will equal the warmer months during 1998. So one wonders if bleaching, from this point forward, will ever take a break of any real significance.

      Reply
  22. John McCormick

     /  July 21, 2016

    The 95 degrees, in Tampa Bay and along the Atlantic coast, is visible evidence of the Gulf Stream slowing as Greenland melts. This is the tipping point that will tip civilization over.

    Reply
  23. John B Davies

     /  July 21, 2016

    Thank you Sam. Very interesting. Difficult to know what, if , is going to happen.

    Reply
  24. As the planet heats up we are treated to a political theater of the absurd by candidates vying for the top chair. The GOP wants to do away with the EPA which I believe was put in place by a republican, Nixon, by the ones still denying the the climate crisis is due to global warming. The news on climate is never good any more, fires are still burning around the planet, ice caps are melting, yet there’s been no call to conserve energy at all. Just a little saving energy could actually help as we implement national measures to transition away from fossil fuels; that is if we have leaders that actually understand the science that’s been there for decades. So choose wisely this fall because for your children’s sake the do need a planet worth living on.

    Reply
  25. Colorado Bob

     /  July 21, 2016

    A tale of two Chinas: Porsche owner abandons his luxury car in Beijing floods while the driver of a budget three-wheel delivery van refuses to leave his vehicle

    Northern China has been hit by some of the worst flooding in years and 75 people are missing or dead

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3700665/At-75-dead-missing-recent-China-flooding.html#ixzz4F3VmTLJE

    Reply
  26. Kalypso

     /  July 21, 2016

    So I have a question. The oceans absorb nearly a half of human emissions of CO2, and the rate of increase in the atmosphere of CO2 is 2 ppm/year. If the ocean shuts down as a carbon sink. Does that mean the 2ppm/year could double to 4 ppm/year?

    Reply
    • So the oceans take in about 26 percent of the human carbon emission, the biosphere takes in about 28 percent, and the remaining 46 percent of the human carbon emission hits the atmosphere.

      See: https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/2013/07/03/how-much-co2-can-the-oceans-take-up/

      Under present fossil fuel emissions, after 54 percent of the human carbon emission is taken in by biosphere and oceans, you get about 2.2 ppm CO2 increase during a typical year. This implies that the no-sink addition would be in the range of 4.5 ppm CO2.

      So if the ocean carbon sink fully shut down (in the real world it would tend to taper off over time), you’d end up with about another 1.1 ppm CO2 for around 3.3 ppm per year under the current emission rate.

      As noted parenthetically, loss of the ocean carbon sink would be gradual. And the Keeling Curve study I posted above actually does appear to be a bit lower than previous ocean carbon uptake estimates near 30 percent. I’d like to see a clear study on carbon sink degradation. But the implication appears to be that some degradation may already be happening. And this makes since as the oceans are rapidly filling up with carbon even as they are rapidly warming.

      The point I wanted to make above is that I haven’t seen a definitive study on carbon sink degradation that gives a good baseline estimate for a potential trend. So it’s tough to say what’s really happening. I could go through and do a survey of various carbon sink studies and carbon uptake studies to see if I could develop some kind of trend line. But mixing up studies and methods in this way is almost a kind of apples and oranges comparison (which can show some of the limits of meta-analysis).

      A fully funded study would be more effective and given how much stress we’ve put on the oceans and biosphere it might be a worthwhile marker to throw out at this time.

      Reply
      • I have seen a recent communication that was claiming that the carbon sink are weakening. The argument was based on an apparent reduction of the amplitude of the annual CO2 concentration curve.

        I can’t find the exact reference unfortunately.

        Reply
  27. Kalypso

     /  July 21, 2016

    If the ocean shuts down as a carbon sink, could the 2ppm/year rate of CO2 increase double to 4 ppm/year. I ask because the oceans absorb close to half of anthropogenic emissions.

    Reply
  28. Spike

     /  July 21, 2016

    Nice article by someone else who realises the gravity of the situation

    http://www.flassbeck-economics.com/how-climate-change-is-rapidly-taking-the-planet-apart/

    Reply
  29. That graph with the rise broken down into twenty year increments and the damages being done by the present temps and CO2 levels indicates to me that the peak of Peak Oil so far, caused by reduced demand for fossil fuels and occurred in July of last year, has come about twenty years too late.

    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: