News 
 National Rural News 
 Agribusiness and General 
 General 
 Floods due to ocean heat? 

Floods due to ocean heat?

13 Jan, 2011 11:45 AM
THE eastern States might be unseasonably cool, but the deluges devastating Queensland are being helped along by record-smashing warmth in the oceans surrounding Australia.

Warmer oceans promote greater evaporation into the atmosphere, while the prevailing La Nina event is generating the convection currents that act as a conveyor belt to stream that moist air over land.

Australia's oceans are currently the warmest they have been since records began in 1900, according to the Bureau of Meterology (BoM).

BoM climatologist Karl Braganza said October, November and December each "smashed" past records for sea surface temperatures in the region, hovering around 0.6C higher than the long term average.

At a global level, Dr Braganza said, every degree increase in global temperatures translates to about an eight per cent increase in "precipitable water"—water in the atmosphere capable of forming rain.

Of that preciptable water, between 1-4 per cent is actually likely to fall as rain.

Brought down to a local level, the percentages become much harder to predict, but the general principle of warmer sea surface temperatures=greater evaporation=great potential for rainfall, hold true.

The moisture from warm oceans is being brought onshore by convection currents generated by an extremely strong La Niña event.

The December Southern Oscillation Index stood at +27.1, the highest December SOI on record, and the highest positive number since the SOI hit a record in November 1973, just before Brisbane was inundated by the January 1974 floods. The index then peaked at over +30.

Of the seven global computer models used to predict ENSO cycles, two forecast that the current La Niña will persist through to April, and the other five predict either a continuation of La Niña conditions or a relapse back to "neutral" conditions.

Across the globe, the past year saw weather go wild. A heatwave in Russia and eastern Europe, floods in Pakistan and China, and blizzards across Europe and North America were part of a climatically tempestuous year.

Global warming at work?

Dr Braganza noted that one extreme flood event does not a global warming make, but each new climate record adds to the trend that points to the underlying effect of warming.

While the computer models can't yet predict how global warming will play out in through the El Niño/La Niña-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) cycles, they have repeatedly predicted that warming will lead to increased "hydrological intensity", or greater extremes of drought and flood, along with temperature extremes.

US agencies NASA and NOAA this week reported that 2010 tied with 2005 as the warmest year on the instrumental record, which began in 1880, and was also the wettest year recorded for the planet. The past decade has also been the warmest on record. Twelve of the warmest years recorded have occurred since 1997.

In November, the World Meterological Organisation reported that greenhouse gas levels had reached their highest levels since pre-industrial times.

The warming effect, or "radiative forcing" of increased greenhouse gases grew by 27.5 per cent between 1990 and 2009, the WMO said.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

RELATED COVERAGE

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Well, if this flood is caused by global warming, and global warming is set to continue for quite some time, then the case for additional dams is overwhelming and incontestible, is it not?

What else could one do when faced with increased drought and increased flooding events? The survival of numerous species will become dependent on our capacity to maintain river flows long after the floods have gone. And that can only mean more dams. To do otherwise would be gross negligence, would it not?

Posted by Ian Mott, 13/01/2011 2:28:35 PM
Clearly attributable to the Pacific ring of fire driven, hydrological cycle. Warm water rising from the sea floor stimulates evaporation & that which goes up must come down somewhere.

Is ring of fire activity adequately monitored for its ocean warming impact?

Posted by jock, 13/01/2011 6:59:09 PM
The BOM says Australia's ocean temperatures are at their highest since 1900.

This is at odds with Bob Teasdale's summary of ARGO data showing cooling ( WUWT Oct 18, 2010, 5:02 pm)

1, the National Oceanographic Data Center has updated itsOCEAN HEAT CONTENT (OHC) data.

2, The update to the OHC data also included major changes, which have reduced the long-term rise in OHC.

3, the linear trend for the Northern Hemisphere OHC data only dropped approximately 2%, while the Southern Hemisphere linear trend dropped about 16%. And the linear trend globally dropped about 9%.

4, The recent changes to the OHC data have not had noticeable effects on the timing of the major variations…that should be attributable to natural variations.

And Bill Illis ( Oct 18, 2010, 5:50 pm) also on the same thread says:

"And we should not expect the deep oceans to be warming right now and bypassing the 0-700 metre ocean. So, from 2003 to 2008/2010, the ocean warming/absorption of GHG warming is not happening."

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/18/update-and-changes-to-nodc-ocean-heat-content-data/

The trend is a definite down with maybe a bit of localised warming. So there!

Posted by Bill Pounder, 13/01/2011 9:47:46 PM
Game, set and match to Bill Pounder.
Posted by Ian Mott, 14/01/2011 10:13:41 AM
I don't know why the government continues to fund the CSIRO and BoM in climate research and assessment when we have so many home grown experts writing into these pages for free.

Could be big savings for the govt here.

Posted by Trugger, 14/01/2011 10:16:02 AM
Evidence for the climatic effects of CO2 is accumulating daily.

This is easily checked by reading the scientific literature. Most scientists are reported as saying that specific floods, droughts, heatwaves, bushfires etc cannot be directly attributed to climate change, but that increasing numbers of unusual climatic events are evidence of a global trend.

Is there any evidence that Pacific vulcanism is responsible for the floods? Or for any other unusual climatic events? It would be interesting to see such evidence.

Posted by nico, 14/01/2011 12:08:14 PM
And Nico what CO2 overload was it that caused the 1955/56 floods where vast areas in many regions of Australia were flooded at the same time. It may have been warmer oceans but I doubt that was caused from excessive CO2. Oceans do have currents, warm and cold, just maybe these have some effect.
Posted by Max, 14/01/2011 2:39:03 PM
I can't believe that this article has been writtren.

As Bill pounder indicates the oceans have been cooling for the last 7 years based on the most reliable measurements we have ever had, argo float data.

Another example of climate change hysteria I suppose.

When it comes to "climate change",

the media quickly jumps on the band wagon, they forget about "drought and flooding rain"

Posted by John Michelmore, 14/01/2011 5:43:14 PM
Perhaps nico would be so kind to explain where the evidence is explaining why during the Jurassic age CO2 was at some 750ppm?

From my recollection human emmissions of CO2 were a bit low then, of course I could be mistaken. I'm sure there is a scientific reason, peer reviewed by a few mates of course.

Or why floods and heatwaves point to AGW but cold, frost and snow is weather.

Or why it has been hotter in times past before industrialisation.

Or why the 1890's floods are still highest on record?

Posted by The Quiet Farmer, 14/01/2011 9:08:10 PM
Yes the evidence for the climatic effects of co2 can be seen daily, The planet will look greener because of all that wonderfull plant food.
Posted by Loc Hey, 15/01/2011 11:41:44 AM
1 | 2 | 3 | 4  |  next >

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
22 September, 2010
07 January, 2011
10 January, 2011
POLL
Q: Do you think Cargill should be allowed to buy AWB?

Yes
(23.2%)

No
(68.5%)

Don't care
(8.3%)

Total Votes: 629
Poll Date: 13 January, 2011

Most popular articles

Advertisement



The Land







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...