Global Average Temperature 2024

[donsutherland1]

25 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

Yes I see the projected monthly temperature for January at NYC has warmed well above 30.0..... the projection was as low as 29.4 just last week.

At the time, the guidance suggested that the closing days of January would be much colder than they will be. The guidance had the air mass originating in northern Russia, which appears on course to verify. But my hypothesis is that the guidance didn't adequately consider that the air mass was actually producing record warmth in that area and wouldn't be exceptionally cold. As the event drew closer, the guidance adjusted temperatures, but remained essentially unchanged with regard to the origin of the air mass. That's why I believe the initial runs didn't adequately consider that the air mass was an unusually warm one from that part of the world.

[LibertyBell]

Just now, donsutherland1 said:

At the time, the guidance suggested that the closing days of January would be much colder than they will be. The guidance had the air mass originating in northern Russia, which appears on course to verify. But my hypothesis is that the guidance didn't adequately consider that the air mass was actually producing record warmth in that area and wouldn't be exceptionally cold. As the event drew closer, the guidance adjusted temperatures, but remained essentially unchanged with regard to the origin of the air mass. That's why I believe the initial runs didn't adequately consider that the air mass was an unusually warm one from that part of the world.

Was this also involved with why that storm suddenly sped up and ruined our historically dry January, Don?  In another thread I noted, it's like getting ready to eat a delicious cake and a pesky fly comes and lands on it and ruins it.

[donsutherland1]

5 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

Was this also involved with why that storm suddenly sped up and ruined our historically dry January, Don?  In another thread I noted, it's like getting ready to eat a delicious cake and a pesky fly comes and lands on it and ruins it.

I don't think so. Models are often off by the timing until events draw closer. I don't have a hypothesis to explain the timing difference, as numerous variables are involved. It's not as as straight-forward as, in this case, the modeling of the air mass appears to have been.

[donsutherland1]

On 1/26/2025 at 7:27 AM, bluewave said:

New study finds that cloud feedbacks amplify the warming more than previously thought.

https://cpo.noaa.gov/scientists-find-cloud-feedbacks-amplify-warming-more-than-previously-thought/

Scientists find cloud feedbacks amplify warming more than previously thought 

 

Clouds play an important role in how much the Earth warms when greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide increase. However, scientists have struggled to determine whether low-level clouds in the tropics slow down or speed up global warming, creating uncertainty in climate predictions. A new study published in Nature and funded by the Climate Program Office’s Modeling, Analysis, Predictions, and Projections (MAPP) program adds to the growing evidence that cloud feedback is very likely to amplify warming in the climate system, rather than reduce it. 

The study found that the impact of clouds in the tropical Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, two areas where low clouds are especially important, is much stronger than scientists previously thought — 71% higher. It also ruled out the possibility that tropical low clouds could have a cooling effect to offset warming. These findings narrow the uncertainty around one of the biggest unknowns in climate science and enable more accurate predictions of how much warming we might expect. This work was possible thanks to new techniques that balanced conflicting data from different regions, giving clearer answers.

The results show that Earth’s climate is likely more sensitive to rising carbon dioxide levels than many models have suggested. A stronger positive cloud feedback means faster and higher levels of warming. It also highlights the need to improve how climate models represent clouds, especially in tropical areas, to prepare better for the challenges of a changing climate. The investigators will extend the value of this study by developing and delivering a piece of software to NOAA that will diagnose issues with low cloud feedback in new versions of NOAA’s modeling systems. This will lead to improvements in NOAA models’ ability to capture appropriate levels of cloud feedback, and improvements in processes that lead to weather and climate prediction skill.

In the early 2000s, climate scientists could not say with confidence whether clouds would mitigate or amplify climate change. Some hypothesized that clouds might work to oppose a significant portion of human-caused warming by reflecting more incoming solar energy back out to space, while others hypothesized that particular changes in clouds might magnify warming by trapping more energy in the atmosphere. In 2001, NOAA’s Geophysical Fluid Dynamics climate model was one of only three that simulated the type of significant positive cloud feedback we now know is likely happening. The MAPP and Climate Variability & Predictability (CVP) programs are advancing cloud representation in climate models through ongoing funded projects. By studying tropical cloud processes and precipitation and improving how they are represented across scales, these efforts are strengthening predictions and providing a clearer picture of our climate future.

Read the study »

I believe the recent cloud-related evidence essentially eliminates the lingering notions that cloud feedbacks would be negative, reaffirms research done by Tierney et al., and that cloud feedbacks can lead to higher climate sensitivity for a doubling of CO2. Moreover, cloud feedbacks seem to be a more robust explanation than aerosol reduction for the modest but real increase in the rate of warming that has been observed. It's uncertain how cloud feedbacks have contributed to the persistence of the warmth since the onset of La Niña. January 2025 will very likely become the warmest January on record globally despite the ongoing La Niña event.

[bluewave]

43 minutes ago, donsutherland1 said:

I believe the recent cloud-related evidence essentially eliminates the lingering notions that cloud feedbacks would be negative, reaffirms research done by Tierney et al., and that cloud feedbacks can lead to higher climate sensitivity for a doubling of CO2. Moreover, cloud feedbacks seem to be a more robust explanation than aerosol reduction for the modest but real increase in the rate of warming that has been observed. It's uncertain how cloud feedbacks have contributed to the persistence of the warmth since the onset of La Niña. January 2025 will very likely become the warmest January on record globally despite the ongoing La Niña event.

Would be great to know exactly what the trigger was for the rapid acceleration in global temperatures back in 2023. Since it occurred much sooner than past El Niños that were much stronger and has lingered beyond anything in the past into a La Niña. It may very well be that we have just have experienced some type of nonlinear or threshold event on a global scale. 
 

 

[LibertyBell]

1 hour ago, donsutherland1 said:

I believe the recent cloud-related evidence essentially eliminates the lingering notions that cloud feedbacks would be negative, reaffirms research done by Tierney et al., and that cloud feedbacks can lead to higher climate sensitivity for a doubling of CO2. Moreover, cloud feedbacks seem to be a more robust explanation than aerosol reduction for the modest but real increase in the rate of warming that has been observed. It's uncertain how cloud feedbacks have contributed to the persistence of the warmth since the onset of La Niña. January 2025 will very likely become the warmest January on record globally despite the ongoing La Niña event.

Maybe that paper about our warming patterns resembling what happened to Venus might be accurate after all.  Venus is clouded over all the time and their greenhouse warming is extreme.

 

[LibertyBell]

1 hour ago, bluewave said:

Would be great to know exactly what the trigger was for the rapid acceleration in global temperatures back in 2023. Since it occurred much sooner than past El Niños that were much stronger and has lingered beyond anything in the past into a La Niña. It may very well be that we have just have experienced some type of nonlinear or threshold event on a global scale. 
 

 

That Hunga Tonga volcano with the expulsion of water vapor into the atmosphere? Water vapor is also a greenhouse gas.

[paulm]

6 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

That Hunga Tonga volcano with the expulsion of water vapor into the atmosphere? Water vapor is also a greenhouse gas.

Paper published last summer argued that the net effect of that eruption was to cool the globe slightly overall, and that the impact from the volcano is now negligible.

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024JD041296

Quote

The Hunga climate forcing has decreased to near zero by the end of 2023.

[GaWx]

5 hours ago, chubbs said:

Here's a map of  Jan temperature anomalies through Jan 25 (JRA reanalysis). Very cold in SE quadrant of US, but there are several very warm areas scattered around the planet to balance. For northern hemisphere land, Eurasia and Canada more than offset a cold US.

The JRA record for Jan is 0.64 set last year, currently 0.71 and likely to be broken this year. Very unusual to break a winter monthly average temperature record in a La Nina, not sure it has ever happened before.

 The Euro Weeklies have been amazingly accurate this winter several weeks out! This 500 mb map below was released on Dec 15th for Jan 6-12, which was at the release time 22-28 days in the future. One can see that the coldest anomalies on the entire globe were targeting the E US even 3-4 weeks out, which verified well. The cold on these and the 2m maps intensified as the period got closer. The Euro did similarly well for the subsequent two weeks (Jan 13-19 and Jan 20-26) well in advance concentrating the coldest on the planet in the E US.

  For Feb they’ve been harping on a much milder pattern in the E US especially south of New England (canonical La Niña Feb pattern) thanks to a -PNA/+AO/+NAO (near opposite of Jan). Based on the Euro’s impressive accuracy weeks in advance and La Niña climo, I see no reason to bet against a much warmer pattern, especially MidAtlantic/Ohio Valley south.

 This Euro 2m temp map is for Feb 3-9: much warmer than Jan especially most of E US and much colder SW Canada and NE Canada/Greenland:

 

 This one is for Feb 10-16: similar

[Typhoon Tip]

1 hour ago, GaWx said:

 The Euro Weeklies have been amazingly accurate this winter several weeks out! This 500 mb map below was released on Dec 15th for Jan 6-12, which was at the release time 22-28 days in the future. One can see that the coldest anomalies on the entire globe were targeting the E US even 3-4 weeks out, which verified well. The cold on these and the 2m maps intensified as the period got closer. The Euro did similarly well for the subsequent two weeks (Jan 13-19 and Jan 20-26) well in advance concentrating the coldest on the planet in the E US.

...
  For Feb they’ve been harping on a much milder pattern in the E US especially south of New England (canonical La Niña Feb pattern) thanks to a -PNA/+AO/+NAO (near opposite of Jan). Based on the Euro’s impressive accuracy weeks in advance and La Niña climo, I see no reason to bet against a much warmer pattern, especially MidAtlantic/Ohio Valley south.

 This Euro 2m temp map is for Feb 3-9: much warmer than Jan especially most of E US and much colder SW Canada and NE Canada/Greenland:
...

 This one is for Feb 10-16: similar

...

 No shit.  huh - I wondered about that, whether or not the eastern continental N/A were among the cooler regions of N/Hemi (relative to normal...) during these central weeks of winter.  Without even seeing this - source/veracity notwithstanding ... - I had a strong hunch this would turn out true, base in no smaller part on the fact that the global means are still honkin' high. I figured it couldn't be like this very many other places - both couldn't be true.   

I wanna also say, this isn't the first time I've noticed this type of "picking on N/A" result since 1998.  It's interesting... I think it's because the base-line perennial pattern features a western N/A "bulge" due to sorting out the westerlies flow; as it's forced to rise over the western cordillera it turns N creating a topographic ridge.

It's subtle though, but when footing that under weather patterning, that gives a constructive feed-back ... Basically what I am getting at is that we are sort of situated favorably to claim one of the cool offset locations.  Doesn't mean it will be that way every year, but some percentage of years in a set of 20 of them ... I bet we get 3 or 4 of them like this.