Globe’s 19th Warmest January in 2012

January 2012 was the globe’s 19th warmest on record, according to NOAA, which is pretty much what one would expect given the prolonged La Niña conditions dominating the tropical Pacific and the fact that we’re still climbing out of the last solar minimum.  The characterization could be made that despite the cooling being exerted, the globe still ended up being warmer than more than 110 other January’s!

It is useful to keep in mind when reading about these type of circumstances that there are multiple signals occurring at the same time (solar, ENSO, AGW, etc.) and the state of global temperature (or any other variable) at any one point in time is but a snapshot within larger trends.

NASA & NOAA: June 2011 Among Top 10 Warmest On Record

According to data released by NASA and NOAA this month, June 2011 ranked among the top 10 warmest Junes on record: NASA recorded the 8th warmest June in its dataset; NOAA recorded the 7th warmest June in its dataset.  The two agencies have slightly different analysis techniques, which actually helps to reinforce the results from each other.

The details:

June’s global average temperatures were 0.50°C above normal (1951-1980), according to NASA.  The warmest regions on Earth are exactly where climate models have been projecting the most warmth to occur for years: high latitudes (think Arctic & Antarctic Circles).  The past three months have a +0.49°C temperature anomaly.  And the latest 12-month period (Jul 2010 – Jun 2011) had a +0.52°C temperature anomaly.  Additionally, the March-April-May period of 2011 tied for the 7th warmest on record.

According to NOAA, June’s global average temperatures were 0.58°C (1.04°F) above the 20th century mean of 15.5°C (59.9°F).  NOAA’s global temperature anomaly map reinforces the message: high latitudes are warming at a faster rate than the mid- or low-latitudes.  The extreme warmth over Siberia is especially worrisome due to the vast methane reserves locked into the tundra and under the seabed near the region.  Methane is a stronger greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, the leading cause of the warmth we’re now witnessing.

These placements high on the list of recorded temperatures come at a time when the recent strong La Nina is coming to an end (which means anomalously cool Pacific waters return to normal temperatures), and when solar irradiance remains at relatively low levels as the most recent solar cycle continues to ramp up.  Recall that a favorite talking point of Deniers is the sun remains the only important component of climate system drivers.  This has been proven false, as 2010, tied for the warmest year on record with 2005, occurred when solar output was at its most recent minimum.  Humans have become the dominant forcing mechanism – a role that doesn’t look likely to end within the next 50-100 years.

Many future Junes will have the opportunity to pass this year’s values.  That’s because the overwhelming majority of heat that has been absorbed in the climate system has been stored in the world’s oceans:

That heat will eventually be released into the atmosphere, making the surface warmer and warmer year after year, decade after decade.  Right now, the atmosphere is being affected by heat that was absorbed by the ocean 50-100 years ago.  The heat absorbed from 1980-current won’t really impact conditions until 2030-2060.  The heat wave impacting the U.S. this year?  That will likely become commonplace by mid-century.  Think about what kind of extreme weather conditions will occur then.

April 2011 CO2 Concentration: 393.18ppm

An average of 393.18ppm CO2 concentration was measured at NOAA’s Mauna Loa, Hawai’i’s  Observatory during April 2011.

That value is the highest in recorded history.  Last year’s 392.49 was the previous highest April value ever recorded.  This year’s value is 0.69ppm higher than April 2010.  It is 0.76ppm higher than March 2011.

A rough extrapolation of the last few months’ concentrations projects out to 394-395ppm in May, the month during which the yearly maximum concentration is typically recorded.

This will likely be the last year that CO2 concentrations will fall below 390ppm during any calendar month.  The aggressive march toward 400ppm continues.  Keep in mind that scientists have recommended that 350ppm is the current target for which humanity should aim in order to keep climate extremes from overwhelming our civilization.

March 2011 CO2 Concentration: 392.40ppm

An average of 392.40ppm CO2 concentration was measured at NOAA’s Mauna Loa, Hawai’i's  Observatory during March 2011.

That value is the 3rd highest in recorded history, behind April and May 2010.  392.40 is the highest March value ever recorded. It is 1.39ppm higher than March 2010.  It is 0.63ppm higher than February 2011.

A rough extrapolation of last month’s concentration projects out to 394-395ppm in May, the month during which the yearly maximum concentration is recorded.

This will likely be the last year that CO2 concentrations will fall below 390ppm during any calendar month.  The aggressive march toward 400ppm continues.  Keep in mind that scientists have recommended that 350ppm is the current target for which humanity should aim in order to keep climate extremes from overwhelming our civilization.

Attempts To Delegitimize Science Will Lead To Higher Rates Of Illness, Death And Incurred Economic Costs

Republican Teabaggers in the U.S. House of Representatives are hell-bent on defunding important government programs that provide critical information regarding threats to U.S. citizens.  I’m not talking about the bloated “defense” department or the almost-as-bloated department of homeland security (whatever that’s supposed to mean).  I’m talking about NOAA and the NWS, two agencies that routinely provide forecasts of short-, medium-, and long-term weather-related forecasts.  Without common-sense funding, these agencies are going to lose capabilities to issue forecasts with the expected level of accuracy to mitigate costs to human lives and economies at all scales.

Think the “private sector” is going to step in and save Americans’ butts?  Think again – what private corporation has remote sensing platforms in place today that could provide the kind of data allowing for similarly accurate and responsive forecasts?  They don’t.  They’re as much in support of socialism as you can be: the American taxpayer pays for those platforms and the expertise held within public agencies to provide, without prejudice, timely information to all of the public equitably.  Even if some private sector entity had resources in place, what do you think they would charge for their information if the government didn’t provide the same information to all users for the same price?  Could you afford to pay the premiums for the best information?  No, the vast majority of Americans could not.  What they have right now is a system in which the costs are socialized and the benefits are just as socialized.

Do you think the government agencies don’t provide accurate or timely information?  Then take a look at what the loss of polar-orbiting satellites would mean for just one case: the February 5-6, 2010 snowstorm that impacted a large swath of high-population areas of the U.S.  Then think about all the storms (and other events) that happen in just one year; how many lives were positively impacted; how much money was saved by having the timely forecasts as accurate as they were.  Why would anyone want to negatively impact lives and drive up the costs of responding to extreme weather events?  Because, like I said, some folks are hell-bent to prove that their extremist ideology trumps everything else, including common sense and decency.  These nutjobs’ attempts to delegitimize science are going to have serious repercussions in the 21st century.

NOAA Data Agrees With NASA Data: November Among Warmest Ever

NOAA released their November Global Analysis about a week ago.  That was a couple of weeks after NASA released their November analysis.  I’m not sure if this was due to data quality control issues, but the result is in line with NASA’s: November 2010 was very warm globally.  NOAA’s methodology differs from NASA’s, which makes comparison between the two a good exercise.

According to NOAA, November 2010 was the 2nd warmest in their dataset (131 years long), slightly behind November 2004.  NASA, in contrast, reported that November 2010 was the warmest in their dataset.  Neither is more correct than the other.  If a large discrepancy in analyzed temperatures appeared between the two, there would be cause for concern.  But both methodologies are producing quite similar results, especially over climatic time periods of multiple decades.

Some numbers:

NOAA recorded a +1.24°F (+0.69°C) temperature anomaly over land and ocean in November 2010.  They recorded a +1.30°F anomaly during November 2004.  2010′s global temperature anomaly “suffered” from La Nina, which cooled the tropical Pacific.  Largely as a result of this, global ocean temperatures were +0.70°F, which tied 1987 and 2008 for the 10th warmest in the NOAA record.  Land temperatures were an astounding +2.74°F warmer than usual.  That beat out 2004′s +2.41°F anomaly.

I want to draw attention to the Northern Hemispheric land temperature anomalies for November 2010.  The previous record was observed in 2001: +2.84°F.  November 2010 set a new record: +3.55°F!  That is neither beating the previous record by a slim margin nor is it indicative of the climate zombies’ favorite mantra, “global cooling”.  You don’t set hemispheric-wide temperature records for an entire month when the globe is cooling, not when the records only last a handful of years.

The global ocean temperatures are worth mentioning again.  Even with a moderate to strong La Nina in place in the previous handful of months affecting the Pacific Ocean, the 10th warmest ocean temperature anomalies on record were observed.  Put another way: the relatively strong signal of El Nino/La Nina is likely now being dominated by the growing signal of global warming.  Will fluctuations occur from year to year?  Of course they will.  Novembers between 2007 and 2010 are a good example.  A relatively wide range of global ocean temperature anomalies were recorded.  But each of them were larger than the similar measurements during the 1990s except for 1997 and 1998, when the strongest El Nino on record occurred.

NOAA also released seasonal and year-to-date numbers.  From September through November, global temperature anomalies were +1.04°F, the 6th warmest in their records.  From January through November, global temperature anomalies were +1.15°F, the warmest on record (beating out 2005′s +1.12°F).  Land temperatures are the warmest in the NOAA record and ocean temperatures are the 3rd warmest.  Doesn’t look like there’s much cooling, does it?

Lastly, I want to make mention of a topic I wrote about recently: for all the temperature records we’re already seeing being broken in recent years, we haven’t seen anything yet.  The vast majority of the heat accumulated by the globe so far as a result of global warming has been stored by the ocean, specifically the deep ocean.  The heat accumulated thus far therefore has not had a chance yet to affect atmospheric temperatures.  As the 21st century progresses, the heat will get that opportunity.  Warm deep water will upwell along continental coastlines, shifting local climates, until enough heat is released back into the atmosphere that the global climate shifts.  Unfortunately for the globe, past warming episodes have tended to occur quite quickly, on the order of tens of years.  That has been a shocking discovery made recently by climate scientists.  Warmer oceans and a warmer atmosphere will induce a higher frequency of severe weather events.  It won’t take much of an increase in the number of those events to cause real problems for governments around the world.  And until we get our greenhouse pollution under control, that’s the future we face: decades to centuries of a warmer climate and more extreme weather events.

Jan-Aug 2010 Hottest On Record: NASA & NOAA

You have likely heard or read by now that the first 8 months of global temperature in 2010 were the warmest of any such period in recorded history.  Unlike earlier months this year, I’ve started to see more coverage of this in the corporate media.  Unfortunately, the coverage I have seen has been short and lacking in critical context.  Most of the coverage has actually been of anecdotal situations, like the record-shattering 2010 Russian heat wave.  Stories about the above-average Atlantic hurricane season and the Pakistani floods leaving tens of millions displaced have typically not included much, if any, notation that record heat has been recorded across the globe.

NOAA recorded the 3rd warmest August on record; the 2nd warmest Jun-Aug on record; and Jan-Aug 2010 tied the same time period from 1998 as the warmest on record.  The most intense El Nino in recorded history occurred in 1997-1998, which helped push global temperatures to record levels.  The El Nino of 2009-2010 wasn’t nearly as strong, but added to the background warming brought about by global warming to match the warmest Jan-Aug in modern history.

August 2010

NASA’s global analysis reported a +0.67°C (+1.206°F) surface temperature anomaly for August 2010 (over the 1951-1980 base period).  August 2010 had the 7th highest anomaly of Augusts in the NASA dataset, according to NASA’s GISS dataset.

NOAA’s global analysis reported a +0.6°C (+1.08°F) surface temperature anomaly for August 2010.  According to the NOAA methodology, the two warmer Augusts observed were in 1998 (+1.3°F) and 2009 (+0.62°C  or +1.12°F).

The Heat Continues: NASA & NOAA Detail Warmest Jan-Jun On Record in 2010

The first half of 2010 has been the hottest globally in recorded history.  A small change from last month: I briefly saw this headline at the top of a corporate media outlet: MSNBC.  I should have taken a screen-shot because I saw it at 10:45P local time last night and it had been replaced by 11:00P when I looked again.  So it would be untruthful to claim, for this month at least, that you couldn’t have seen this story covered in a prominent way by the corporate media.  I will lament that it took four straight months of record warmth before they did, however.  I will also lament that it was replaced, nearly in the middle of night, by other headlines within minutes – short shrift for such an important topic.

In a similar fashion as last month, the NOAA analysis of global temperatures have marked the warmest month of June, the warmest 3-month April to June period and, along with NASA, the warmest 6-month January to June period in recorded human history.  That makes for one heck of a headline, doesn’t it?

June 2010

NASA’s global analysis reported a +0.59°C (+1.062°F) surface temperature anomaly for June 2010 (over the 1951-1980 base period).  June 2010 joined June 2005 as the third highest anomaly in the NASA dataset, behind the record anomaly from 1998 of 0.69°C (1.24°F) and the 0.62°C (1.116°F) anomaly from 2009, according to NASA’s GISS dataset.

NOAA’s global analysis reported a +0.68°C (+1.224°F) surface temperature anomaly for June 2010.  According to the NOAA methodology, the next warmest June was observed in 2005: +0.66°C (+1.188°F).

No Surprise: NASA & NOAA Detail Warmest May, Mar-May & Jan-May On Record in 2010; Future Hot Summers In The U.S. In Store

The first five months of 2010 have been the warmest in recorded history.  But have you seen that story covered by the corporate media?  Nope – and you aren’t likely to any time soon either … at least until the records become so widespread and intense that there’s no longer much we can do about them.

Both the NASA and NOAA analyses of global temperatures have marked the warmest month of May, the warmest 3-month March to May period and the warmest 5-month January to May period in recorded human history.  Both datasets go back 131 years into the past.  The warmest month, 3-month and 5-month periods out of 131 other years has been reached.  Perhaps if the highest scoring Super Bowl in history had just occurred, some corporate entity might be interested in covering it.

May 2010

NASA’s global analysis reported a +0.66°C (+1.134°F) surface temperature anomaly for May 2010 (over the 1951-1980 base period).  This tied the previous record anomaly from 1998 and beat the 0.59°C (1.062°F) anomaly from 2005, according to NASA’s GISS dataset.

NOAA’s global analysis reported a +0.69°C (+1.24°F) surface temperature anomaly for May 2010.  According to the NOAA methodology, the next warmest May was observed in 1998: +0.63°C (+1.13°F).

January-May 2010

With record and near-record monthly temperature averages observed so far in 2010, it is no surprise to see the January-May period this year also setting a temperature record.  According to NASA, the Jan-May 2010 period has been the warmest at +0.72°C (+1.3°F).  For comparison, NASA includes the same period from the two warmest years in their dataset so far: 2005 and 1998.  Globally averaged surface temperatures in Jan-May 2005 were +0.62°C (+1.118°F) and during the same period in 1998 were +0.61°C (+1.098°F).  So the Jan-May 2010 observed warmth was 0.10°C more than the same period in the warmest year to date on record.

According to NOAA, the Jan-May 2010 period has also been the warmest: +0.68°C (+1.224°F).  The NOAA site also contains information from the same period during the warmest or the next warmest year on record.  Their methodology differs slightly from NASA’s, but is just as valid and acts as an independent check on the other dataset.  NOAA’s methodology identified 1998 as the next warmest for global land and ocean surface temperatures at +0.67°C (+1.21°F).

Context

Global averages and multi-year trends are all very well and nice, but what do these records mean?  Is there a way to contextualize them in more day-to-day terms so that more of the public can understand the threat they pose?  I think so.  I’m going to provide a couple of examples that mean something to me; hopefully they help clarify the problem for others as well.

Record high temperatures have been occurring in the Middle East and Africa.  I know, big shock, you haven’t heard of those in the corporate media either.  Well, they happened.  I’m sure one of the stereotypical concepts of the Middle East and portions of Africa is the incredible heat the region experiences.  So what kind of records are we talking about?  Try 125.6°F (50°C) in Basra, Iraq on June 14; 125.6°F (50°C) in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia on June 22; 117.7°F (47.6°C) in Faya, Chad on June 22; 116.8°F (47.1°C) in Bilma, Niger.  Bahrain had its hottest day ever in June on the 20th – 46.9°C; Qatar similarly hit its hottest June day ever with 48.8°C.  Kuwait saw 123.8°F (51°C) on June 15th, missing their hottest all-time temperature by 1°F (0.9°C).  Myinmu, Myanmar hit its all-time record high back on May 12th – 116.6°F (47°C).

Okay, those are some really high temperatures.  Along the Front Range in Colorado, 100°F and higher have until now represented extremely hot days.  The frequency of 100°F days was, in the 20th century, pretty low – a couple of days at most during any one year, as the figure below from a recent NOAA report shows.

We have a choice to emit fewer emissions through the end of this century or more emissions. How many 100°F days could Colorado see if we take the low emissions path? 7-21 per year (1-3 weeks) for the Front Range and 35-49 per year (5-7 weeks) for southeast Colorado, as the next figure shows.  It is important to keep in mind that this emissions scenario depends on us changing our rate of pollution quickly and aggressively, something that does not look likely to happen.

Given our current, actual greenhouse gas emissions, which track along or slightly above the IPCC’s A1F1 scecario (the highest they considered), what kind of summers can we expect to see later this century?  8 weeks of 100°F days every year could become “normal”.  Not once or twice a year – up to 2 months of 100°F days.  Areas in southeast Colorado could be subjected to 12 weeks of 100°F days – the entire summer! – as the figure below shows.

In fact, nearly the entire country would, for the first time, experience 100°F days. The desert southwest? Given their current maximum yearly temperatures, I have to think they would find out what the Middle East goes through. Can you imagine what weeks of 100°F days would do to our agriculture, power sources and water supplies?  If we can imagine that hellish future, do we want to avoid it?  I hope that images like these and the implications of those realities coming to be will spur even more people to change their own personal lives as well as demand changes on the local, state, national and international scales.  Those temperature records I started out with could seem relatively balmy compared to the high emissions future we’re headed toward.

NASA & NOAA: April 2010 Hottest on Record; Jan-Apr 2010 Hottest on Record

Both NASA and NOAA released their separate analyses of global temperatures through April 2010 this week.  Both agencies come to the same conclusions: April 2010 was the warmest April on record; the four-month period of Jan-Apr 2010 was the warmest such period on record (dating back to 1880).

April 2010

NASA’s analysis reported a +0.73°C (+1.314°F) surface temperature anomaly for April 2010 (over the 1951-1980 base period).  This easily beat the previous record 0.66°C (1.188°F) anomaly from 2007 and the 0.62°C (1.116°F) anomaly from 2005, according to NASA’s GISS dataset.

NOAA’s analysis reported a +0.76°C (+1.37°F) surface temperature anomaly for April 2010.  According to the NOAA methodology, the next warmest April was observed in 1998: +0.71°C (+1.28°F).

January-April 2010

With record and near-record monthly temperature averages observed so far in 2010, it is no surprise to see the January-April period this year also setting a temperature record.  According to NASA, the Jan-Apr 2010 period has been the warmest at +0.75°C (+1.35°F).  For comparison, NASA includes the same period from the two warmest years in their dataset so far: 2005 and 1998.  Globally averaged surface temperatures in Jan-Apr 2005 were +0.64°C (+1.152°F) and during the same period in 1998 were +0.61°C (+1.098°F).  So the Jan-Apr 2010 observed warmth was 0.11°C more than the same period in the warmest year to date on record.  And yet the science-hating climate change deniers can’t stop themselves from talking about “global cooling”!  I will point out again that these temperature records are occurring at a time when the lowest and longest solar minimum in a century is just ending.  What will the next 5 to 10 years look like?

According to NOAA, the Jan-Apr 2010 period has also been the warmest: +0.69°C (+1.24°F).  The NOAA site also contains information from the same period during the warmest or the next warmest year on record.  Their methodology differs slightly from NASA’s, but is just as valid and acts as an independent check on the other dataset.  NOAA’s methodology identified 2002 as the next warmest for global land and ocean surface temperatures at +0.68°C (+1.22°F).  While the NOAA data don’t indicate the incredible surge in surface temperatures that the NASA data does, a record is a record.  Moreover, the long-term trend is really what counts.  And in both the NOAA and NASA datasets, the long-term trends are bad in terms of upcoming ramifications on ecosystems and human societies.

The NOAA report also includes information on tropospheric and stratospheric temperatures.  I want to point out that April 2010 has the 2nd warmest lower tropospheric (lowest 5mi/8km) of the atmosphere on record: +0.50°C (+0.90°F), behind 1998 which saw +0.76°C (+1.37°F) temperatures.  There is a big difference in this dataset from the ones I discuss above: the troposphere data goes back only 32 years.  Here is a visual representation of the dataset for Aprils from 1979-2010.  However, the data show the same kind of trend that the surface temperatures show: up.  1998 was likely affected more because of the intensity of the El Nino that was present over the 1997-1998 northern hemispheric winter season.  There has also been an El Nino event this winter, but has affected temperatures globally in slightly different ways.

I would like to mention something else at this point.  The Bush Regime tried very hard to delay or cancel satellite missions that would continue to monitor different conditions globally from being funded, and thereby launched.  Satellites don’t operate forever; replacements must be planned for and successfully launched and operated – all of which requires less interference from political hacks, like those that were put into publicly funded agencies by Bush.  I felt that interference was one of the under-reported stories in the last decade.  Without up-to-date technologies being planned and put into place to monitor conditions, some of the observations discussed in this post wouldn’t be possible.

2010 should set the annual average temperature record if the trends seen so far this year continue.  Natural processes and cycles are being overwhelmed by anthropogenic forcing (greenhouse gas pollution).  That’s why the proposed climate and energy legislation in both chambers of the U.S. Congress are so important.  That’s why the legislation must be strengthened, not weakened.  We continue along with business as usual at our own peril.

Cross posted at SquareState.