Has global warming stopped? The tap of incoming energy cannot be turned off

Has global warming stopped? The tap of incoming energy cannot be turned off
Credit: CAS

As a result of industrialization, the carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere has increased continuously over the past 100 years, which is considered the main reason behind global warming. However, the observational global mean atmospheric temperature leveled off over the first decade of the 21st century, in contrast to the rapid warming during the late 20th century. This phenomenon, known as the "atmospheric warming slowdown" or "global warming hiatus," has attracted great attention worldwide owing to its ostensible contradiction of the human-induced global warming theory.

The changes in ocean heat content might have a tight relationship with the atmospheric warming slowdown. Dr. Changyu Li, Prof. Jianping Huang and their colleagues, a group of researchers from the Key Laboratory for Semi-Arid Climate Change of the Ministry of Education, College of Atmospheric Sciences, Lanzhou University, have had their findings published in Advances of Atmospheric Sciences.

In their paper, they explore the energy redistribution between the atmosphere and ocean at different latitudes and depths by using as well as simulations of a coupled atmosphere-ocean box model.

"Imagine the energy transport in our climate system as a ," Dr. Li says. "Let's turn on a tap at the top of the system, the feed rate of which represents the top-of-the-atmosphere radiative imbalance caused by the greenhouse effect. A bucket below the tap can be an analogue of our atmosphere, and its water level is analogous to atmospheric warming. There is also a sinking flow at its bottom, draining into a larger bucket (i.e. the ocean). Now, here comes the key point. Generally, the water level of the atmospheric bucket rises as a result of . However, if the drain rate approximately equals the feed rate of the tap, the water level of the bucket will not increase (the occurrence of the warming slowdown). That's the basic idea of our coupled box model."

"A rapid increase in the global ocean heat content has been detected in observations during the warming slowdown period, at a rate of about 9.8 × 1021 J yr-1. That is, from the energy point of view, there is no slowdown in global warming if we take the ocean into consideration," he adds. "Furthermore, the increase of heat content provides a worrisome picture of the ocean. This rapid oceanic warming could lead to serious degradation of marine ecosystems, eventually becomes a great threat to the ocean biodiversity."


Explore further

No pause in global warming in the past 100 years

More information: Changyu Li et al, Atmospheric Warming Slowdown during 1998–2013 Associated with Increasing Ocean Heat Content, Advances in Atmospheric Sciences (2019). DOI: 10.1007/s00376-019-8281-0
Citation: Has global warming stopped? The tap of incoming energy cannot be turned off (2019, October 10) retrieved 20 October 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2019-10-global-incoming-energy.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
40 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Oct 10, 2019
I am 100% for the reduction of chemical admissions but I am very concerned that global warming science is taking a hard blow for not telling the truth. I ask you all this question...How many global warming climate papers have you read that explained how old the glaciers are? How many times have you ever heard a climate scientist explain that the glaciers formation marked the beginning of the current ice age?

Do you trust a science that withholds obvious 1+1=2 science? I am not backing pollution but I am not in favor of any science that purposely leaves out facts to further it's agenda.

Oct 10, 2019
carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere has increased continuously over the past 100 years, which is considered the main reason behind global warming

Does carbon dioxide also explain the many cycles of glaciation and global warming over the last 800,000 years? See here:

https://www.clima...arge.png

Humans didn't generate significant carbon dioxide until about 70 years ago. What explains the long-term natural warming and cooling variations of up to 25° F over the last 800,000 years? Until we know that, and can remove that natural variation from the data, we cannot definitively say that carbon dioxide is the main cause of recent warming.

The ocean temperature data set is extremely sparse both spatially and temporally. It is impossible to infer ocean heat content increase of " 9.8 × 10²¹ J yr-1" with any reasonable precision.

Just for fun try explaining the global temperature decrease between 1940 and 1975.

Oct 10, 2019
This paper states that there was, indeed, a warming hiatus. That contradicts recent statements debunking the hiatus. So, which is it? I hiatus that can be explained away, as this paper does? Or no hiatus at all?

Oct 10, 2019
What explains the long-term natural warming and cooling variations of up to 25° F over the last 800,000 years?
- Aksdad

If you were interested in the answer to that question, 5 seconds with Google would provide you with the answer.

Are you too retarded to do that, or are you just not interested in the answer to the question you just asked and which 14 year old children learn in school.

https://en.m.wiki...h_cycles

Oct 10, 2019
@sassifras69.
I am 100% for the reduction of chemical admissions but I am very concerned that global warming science is taking a hard blow for not telling the truth. I ask you all this question...How many global warming climate papers have you read that explained how old the glaciers are? How many times have you ever heard a climate scientist explain that the glaciers formation marked the beginning of the current ice age? Do you trust a science that withholds obvious 1+1=2 science? I am not backing pollution but I am not in favor of any science that purposely leaves out facts to further it's agenda.
Your understanding/logic is flawed, mate. IF these glaciers formed at ice age 'beginning', then WHY ARE THEY MELTING NOW; where has your "current ice age" gone? You also seem unaware that glaciers on ALPINE MOUNTAINS/RANGES at FREEZING ALTITUDES can form ANYWAY, 'ice age' or not. The problem NOW is: they're MELTING due to AGW heating at those altitudes.

Do/Think better, mate. :)

Oct 10, 2019
@aksdad
@BobSage.

The natural variations over geologic ages have long been known and included in timelines for global climate changes. The problem NOW is that humans have been burning fossil fuels that NATURE SEQUESTERED LONG AGO before HUMANS adapted to the global climate we have enjoyed up till the industrial revolution age, which is when OUR FOSSIL FUELS BURNING at industrial scale/rate started to UN-NATURALLY destabilise the previous tolerable range for us and our agriculture, domesticated animals and our transportation and buildings infrastructure. Any 'hiatus' was illusory, because the ocean waters and land/mountain ranges were colder at the beginning of our coal/oil/forests-burning frenzy; meaning that the warming went into these 'buffers'. But NOW these buffers are reaching 'saturation point, absorbing less heat AND less CO2: hence why warming will be more noticeable from now on. Try to connect all the dots, and not just confine yourself to fossil/GOP lobby 'spiels'. :)

Oct 10, 2019
This paper states that there was, indeed, a warming hiatus. That contradicts recent statements debunking the hiatus. So, which is it? I hiatus that can be explained away, as this paper does? Or no hiatus at all?

No hiatus at all. During the "hiatus" period, the oceans continued to warm (https://en.wikipe..._content ). Since the oceans absorb the bulk of the extra heat due to global warming (> 90%), that's how you can tell if there's a hiatus. Land surface temperatures may slow down, but the ocean heat content hasn't stopped at all.

Oct 10, 2019
@zz, we been tellin' 'em that for 10 years and they're still not listening.

Oct 10, 2019
Meanwhile I'm having trouble wrapping my head around the fact that this pretty amateurish and puerile article has appeared on my favorite science site. This stuff is about appropriate for kindergartners. Of course, that makes it about appropriate for the trolls.

Oct 11, 2019
@ RealityCheck I understand where you are confused and that is my major gripe with climate science. Why hasn't anyone informed the public or you, for that matter, the facts so that ypu can join the conversation with proper knowledge.

I will give you a synopsis that can be found straight from any professional science book.

220 million years ago the glaciers melted at which time the karoo ice age ended. The planet was devoid of ice for 200 million years until about 30 million years ago when the ice started to form again. The ice eventually created glaciers about 3 million years ago and that is the start of our current ice age.

Oct 11, 2019
I also want to make it clear that the CO2 levels are very bad at the moment. Somewhere above 400ppm. That is higher than anytime during the current ice age for CO2 levels. So there is definite cause for alarm. When there is no ice on the planet the total land goes from 30% of the Earth to around 20% or less. That is a bad bad situation. My issue is with the glabal warming science group either not understanding how long the glaciers have been here (which means they are idiots) or purposely ignoring that fact(which mean they might be falsifying data).

Oct 12, 2019
Kinda forgot about a few glaciations since the Karoo, haven't you?

Oct 12, 2019
@sassifras69.

You seem to be the one confused, mate. If we are in a "current ice age", as you keep asserting, then what has happened to it? Mountain glaciers have been seen receding over the last hundred years; and the arctic/antarctic are warming at an accelerating rate and further melting their sea-ice/ice-caps. I'm glad you acknowledge the problem with CO2 concentration in the atmosphere due to industrial-scale burning of coal/oil; but am saddened by your failure to connect the dots and acknowledge also that AGW is the problem now, without any sign of the "current ice age" (which you keep asserting we are in, but which is signally 'missing in action' while our planet warms dangerously due to greenhouse gases which we keep putting into the atmosphere at industrial scales). Maybe you should do further research of your own, @sassifras69; and this time take into account ALL the facts/factors relevant to the current situation we ALL face now. Good luck to you, mate; and to us all. :)

Oct 15, 2019
@ RealityCheck I totally understand that some people can't grasp the concept but I am not sure why your not able to. You seem to have some scientific knowledge but you may fall into the group of people that understand the reality but don't want the facts to be accepted by mainstream pop culture science.

The presence of glaciers=ice age. Ice age literally means that glaciers are present.

Oct 15, 2019
@sassifras69.
The presence of glaciers=ice age. Ice age literally means that glaciers are present.
Now you're just 'taking the piss' and 'stirring the pot' just to see who you can gull with your trolling antics, mate! :)

Unfortunately for your attempts to 'convince the suckers' that you are 'intelligently/courageously proselytising mainstream pop culture science', your knowledge/definition is patently 'way out of whack'. :)

CONSIDER: Glaciers can form even in TROPICAL REGIONS where MOUNTAINS are tall enough to have their upper sections at COLD ALTITUDES where the air remains BELOW FREEZING in summer. Get that? :)

That's why HIMALAYAS, ALPS have snow/glaciers practically all year round on their highest peaks. The problem NOW is AGW WARMING ATMOSPHERE at those altitudes.

I already pointed that out for you; but you clearly failed to 'get' its significance, and came back with your above simplistic/erroneous 'troll-turd'. Better luck with your next 'troll-crap', mate. :)

Oct 15, 2019
@zz, we been tellin' 'em that for 10 years and they're still not listening.
......and it's just because YOU'RE the one who's been saying it for 10 years, even before you changed your moniker to Da Schneibo I remember reading your incomprehensible jargon.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more