Climate, Weather and Energy. Using a Climatic Regime to explain Weather Events by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD
By Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD.CV english and español. Resume. Interdisciplinary Skills applied in the line of research presented.- Index for all analyses published. – Shares and Feedback at LinkedIn
(last modified 26/4/2018 with animations added from previous analyses) Pdf available at Researchgate “Climate, Weather and Energy. Using a Climatic Regime to explain Weather Events by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD” April 2018 DOI:10.13140/RG.2.2.27923.58406 Profile Diego Fdez-Sevilla
Based on previous analyses, the weather developments associated with the Heat wave unfold over Europe through the middle of April 2018, seem to support the validity of the conclusions raised throughout the line of research presented.
It has been a subject of attention in Climatic research to look at the properties found in Weather Events with the intention to find in those weather events links expressing a Climatic Change.
In my line of research I have applied the idea of that a climate is made by the weather events occurring, like a forest is made by the trees populating it. Based on this idea, a forest can only exist if the conditions are suitable for the trees to grow. In other words, Climate can be understood as the conditions in an environment which allows or inhibits the growth of trees, the development of “events”. Consequently, if we can understand the Climate which is being developed, the properties and conditions of the environment where “events” are expected “to grow”, we should be able to foresee the type of forest that it will grow.
Accordingly, the ultimate challenge in my line of research is to evaluate if the Climatic Drift and the environmental characteristics created by it, that my previous analyses describe, can accommodate the atmospheric patterns and weather events associated found in real-time. (see index at timeline page and publications including the word “follow-up”)
Climate, Weather and Energy
The question driving the whole debate on Climatic Deviations from “a Normal”, or Climatic Drift, focus most of the methodologies on temperature.
However I have followed a different approach in my analyses looking at Gradients of Energy in all its forms. That is why in 2014 I offered my thoughts as a theory of practical applications.
Energy fuels the work done by warm masses of air displacing colder masses of air in their path. That increases mixing patterns generating anomalies in temperature. So behind an increase in the amount of work carried out by masses of air there is an increase in the energy fuelling such dynamics. Energy can only be transferred, not created or destroyed. So more work means more energy in circulation. More energy in circulation can only be sustained by a substance carrying it. Either if we consider that the energy driving anomalies comes from the Sun or from the Oceans, the carrier has to be in the atmosphere in order for the energy to produce work. And the body loosing heat cools down.
E.g. A corridor of wind over the Arctic is triggered by a conversion of Temperature into work, convection and advection, which are the result of mixing masses of air. As I have published in previous analyses, such Trans-Arctic connection between Atlantic and Pacific Basins is part of a pattern increasing the mixing ratio between masses of air otherwise separated by thermal compartmentalization, like the Polar Jet Stream. An increase in the dispersion of energetic forms have different outcomes, one of which it would be a temporary reduction in the average temperature resultant for the mixing between Cold (Arctic) and warm (Mid-Latitude) masses of air as well as in altitude (SSW).
So “temperature” is less reliable than looking at “work” seen even in the “mild” events.
Ultimately I have looked at “Climate” being defined by the amount of energy free to do work. In other words, energy free to grow trees. So in my research I define Climate by the amount and state of energy in circulation, and Weather by the use of this energy.
- Talking about climate May 12, 2015 https://wp.me/p403AM-yO I believe that Temperature has been a very bad parameter used to understand our atmospheric circulation when there is not consideration on that Temperature is just one form of energy. Energy which does not disappear when Temperature decreases, it gets only transformed and transported.
- Climate. Looking at the forest for the trees April 9, 2015. https://wp.me/p403AM-wN We can use weather patterns, being considered all together, to create a profile describing a planetary climatic system… When looking at our climate, we can try to understand it by looking at it as a whole, but also, we can look at it as the result coming from combining what represents the requirements to allow the viability for each single meteorological event, like looking at the forest for the trees.”
- Statistical Significance and The Scary Side of Being Mild October 9, 2017 https://wp.me/p403AM-1DP
Accordingly with the definition applied for Climate and Weather, my definition of Climate Drift is:
The deviation from equilibrium of the conditions allowing the perpetuity of an established symbiotic relationship between biotic and none biotic components in a micro and macro ecosystem. This situation can be due to changes in any component of the ecosystem playing a synergistic effect over the rest. And the causes can be either a change in the magnitude of the already implemented forces in place, changes in the directionality or rates in the flows of energy pre-established OR/AND the impact suffered by the incorporation of new components/forces and energy sinks or sources in any part of the system interfering with the previously established order and balance.
The main conclusion from my 4 years of researching synergistic interactions between all transformations seen over the Liquid, Gaseous and solid phases of our global Environment indicates that anthropogenic activity is forcing our environment into A System Becoming Dominated By Free Energy. (DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18509.13289 https://wp.me/p403AM-1Bb)
The biotic component of our environmental system is the only one capable of interacting against thermodynamic entropy, against instability. And for as long as Human activity can not replicate such mechanisms in equilibrium with the resources consumed, it might be time to think about domesticating Human Activities instead of following the obsession for Domesticating Natural Behaviour and Geoengineer our Weather.
The analyses performed in my line of research describe a Climatic Drift, from pre-established atmospheric conditions strongly compartmentalised in Altitude and Latitude, towards a Climatic Regime characterised by an instability originated by patterns of Trans-latitudinal and Vertical mixing. An increase in atmospheric motion inducing sudden and extreme changes in atmospheric conditions generating weather events with abnormal properties for a particular location, throughout latitudes, longitudes and altitudes.
Some examples among the total analyses carried out. See full index here
- (Updated 22/Dec/14) New theory proposal to assess possible changes in Atmospheric Circulation (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) Researchgate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.4859.3440
- November 14, 2014. Why there is no need for the Polar Vortex to break in order to have a wobbling Jet Stream and polar weather? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) Researchgate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2500.0488
- (UPGRADED 24th March2015) Revisiting the theory of “Facing a decrease in the differential gradients of energy in atmospheric circulation” by Diego Fdez-Sevilla. Researchgate: DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.1975.7602/1
- May 14, 2015. A roller-coaster of temperatures in South Europe. Spain (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) ResearchGate: DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27634.20165
- March 3, 2016. Seasonality Spring 2016. Continuous follow-up on my previous research assessing atmospheric dynamics. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.) Researchgate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2833.8968
- September 8, 2015 A Climate “Between Waters” (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla). Reasearchgate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.1697.5847
- October 21, 2015 Discussing Climatic Teleconnections. Follow Up On My Previous Research (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) ResearchGate: DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2962.7605
- September 14, 2016 Between Global Cooling and Global Warming There Is “Global Mixing” (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, Ph.D.) Researchgate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19874.63684
- October 7, 2016 Equatorial Dynamics. A conversation between Joaquin and Matthew (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.) Researchgate: DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13720.08960
- October 13, 2016 Global Mixing in Atmospheric Dynamics (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla Ph.D.) ResearchGate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21255.60320
- November 17, 2016 Arctic Amplification versus Arctic Absorption (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.) Researchgate: DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.24688.35848
- February 28, 2018 Arctic Warming as a Result of Convective Forcing by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD Pdf at ResearchGate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34551.73125
- November 5, 2015 There is Ice or Frost In Antarctica? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) Researchgate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17938.15048
- March 3, 2017 The Antarctic Bubble (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD)
Heat waves over Europe
The proportional distribution of temperatures in a black body suggested by the Stefan-Boltzmann law, does not apply for a heterogeneous medium as it is the atmosphere in our planet.
- March 10, 2016. Tangled in Words. Atmospheric Dynamics, Stefan Boltzmann Calculations and Energy Balance (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.)
We have seen it through the Winter 17-18 with warmer than normal temperatures in the Arctic than in lower latitudes;
- February 28, 2018. Arctic Warming as a Result of Convective Forcing by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD
- March 14, 2018. Visualising Wind and Convective Forcing Driving Climatic Dynamics. Follow-up on previous analyses by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD
Warm intrusions over the Poles due to Convective forcing has inhibited the formation of ice in the NH and it has taken Antarctica to reach its minimum sea ice extent for this part of the year as “the second lowest in the satellite record.”(http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2018/03/a-warm-approach-to-the-equinox/)
And we see it again over Europe with warmer temperatures in UK than in Spain or the Canary Islands.
- 19 Apr 2018. TheGuardian. Hottest April day in almost 70 years with Temperature tops 28C in UK https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/19/uk-could-enjoy-hottest-april-day-in-almost-70-years
Altogether the dynamics seen support the conclusions offered suggesting an increase in mixing processes driving atmospheric circulation. A work fuelled by energy introduced in the atmosphere in free state, absorbed by GHGs and delivered in location by water vapour.
Using a Climatic Regime to explain Weather Events by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD
The heat wave recorded over the UK is a Weather Event which can be categorised as the result of a climatic regime in which the energy contained by the atmosphere in free state is high enough to produce “work” expanding its volume towards higher latitudes by convective forcing. This work is strong enough to displace the Polar Jet Stream northwards and brake any gradient of temperature from the Equator as suggested by the Stephan-Boltzmann law.
This dynamic supports the conclusions reached in the line of research presented describing a transition from a climate dominated by tilt configurations towards a Climate dominated by Kinetic Energy driving Convective Forcing inducing an increase in atmospheric mixing. From orbital seasonality into Kinetic seasonality.
|February 21, 2014||From previous analysis: Resilience in our models (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) ResearchGate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27974.98884In our global ecosystem, there is a debate about if there has been an increase in heat or temperature. Which would be the mechanisms of resilience in our global environment working to absorb or release those increases in heat or temperature? I would go with water as the heat/energy carrier and the weather systems as the physical mechanics to redistribute and release heat/energy. Like stirring a spoon to cold down your soup. So I like to see the use of “storage of energy by the climate system” used to determine the range of climate perturbations in the IPCC report on Climate.|
After seeking feedback from experts in the field by email ( Jennifer Francis among them, link here) and platforms such as AGU and NOAA groups at linkedIn, my assessments have not received comments or arguments invalidating the assessments presented. Even thought I am aware of that in order to consider any value over such assessments, some people need to see it in a peer reviewed article published in a renown journal, due to the lack of institutional support, I am unable to bring my research into official channels of scientific journalism. Therefore, I expose my assessments in this blog trying to allow anyone to be the reviewer contrasting current developments with my assessments enabling Official Bodies and Established scientists to consider the value of my research despite its informal format.
After leaving months, even years of time to expose my conclusions for public discussion and review, once those have no faced any criticism or arguments refuting their value, I create a pdf file and a DOI publishing them at my profile in Researchgate. In order to maintain their genuineness and legitimate innovative nature, I keep its original state so those can be compared with any copy made by any third party at any time. For your own references and review over its originality over time with respect to other publications via scientific papers and/or news reports, you can compare the publications at the blog and researchgate with the records archived:
- at the web.archive.org site http://web.archive.org/web/*/diegofdezsevilla.wordpress.com
- ResearchGate profile https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Diego_Fdez-Sevilla
- LinkedIn Public shares https://diegofdezsevilla.wordpress.com/diego-fdez-sevilla-phds-research-reach/
- Full Index of Analyses and Timeline https://diegofdezsevilla.wordpress.com
- Linkedin Group AGU: https://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=2196290&type=member&item=5986214897078272003
- LInkedin Group NOAA: https://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=156873&type=member&item=5986214921963077634)
– Q&A Addendum (23rd April2018)-
The Anthropogenic Link
The publication of this piece in my profile at LinkedIn had a follow-up comment questioning the “Anthropogenic Link”. I made a comment which I want to incorporate as part of the line of research in which it is involved:
(Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD 20 April2018)
From my analyses, discussions and arguments, I am offering the description of a scenario missing in Official Research. A scenario in which I find coherence for all the events occurring and the dynamics seen.
Following Stephen Carpenter words in his lecture for the Robert H. MacArthur Award: Scenarios provide a framework for finding robust decisions that have acceptable consequences no matter how events turn out. Scenarios may not lead to a unique optimal decision. Instead, they make it possible to compare possible actions in light of diverse models, multiple causes, and ambiguous, uncontrollable aspects of the future. Scenarios encourage action, whereas uncertainties sometimes lead to doubt, inaction, and further analysis. Honest and accurate assessment of uncertainty is an important function of science, yet we need more than just a measure of uncertainty. Scenarios bring science into decisions that must be made now, rather than after further research.” (Included in the the publication: “Climate. A System Becoming Dominated By Free Energy. The “Drama”, Character Driven VS Plot Driven (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD) August 31, 2017 https://wp.me/p403AM-1Bb)
There is a very representative image over the anthropogenic influence that I describe in previous analyses having an impact over the thermodynamic system which is our climate:
- May 7, 2015 Domesticating Nature. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) Researchgate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36812.51848 https://diegofdezsevilla.wordpress.com/2015/05/07/domesticating-nature-by-diego-fdez-sevilla/
Rain clouds generated mechanically through engine developed by NASA
(Q&A by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD) Things are more complicated than that. Water vapour is formed in natural environments in an endothermic process, consumes energy and decreases temp absorbing heat. This one, is exothermic, releases energy and increases the temperature in the surrounding environment, plus increases the chances to release ionized compounds (Hx, Ox, OH, NOx) and move other compounds dissolved from the surrounding atmosphere. That process will go all the way up to the stratosphere. There are many things that separate this process from the common rain and the common evaporation process delivering water vapour. There are other factors which are involved in assessing the complete impact from the whole cycle involved in this technology. The production of the Hydrogen consumed comes from fossil compounds CHx which comes with a print in energy consumption, emissions and infrastructures to produce, storage, handling, transport, and overall maintain at low temperatures as liquid. Similar for Liquid Oxygen. As a form of propulsion it might be the “best” available. As a form of making rain, is like planting solar panels to repopulate a forest, or using chemotherapy to remove body hair. And remember, energy is not destroyed or created, it comes from, it goes into?…
If you wonder about magnitudes enough to force a Climatic drift, we have to remember that the size of something is not proportional to the energy required to alter its position or behaviour, that is what we know from catalysts or the simple use of a switch.
See related publications in full at source following the links embedded within the text and those at the title.
If you do not know the previous work shared in the line of research presented in this blog since 2013 here you can read some extratcs from previous related analyses:
March 2015 Extract From: Steering climate´s course (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) March 27, 2015 https://diegofdezsevilla.wordpress.com/2015/03/27/steering-climates-course-by-diego-fdez-sevilla/
Arctic Amplification has introduced feedback effects associated with temperature, water vapour and clouds. Changes in the surface albedo feedback—the increase in surface absorption of solar radiation when snow and ice retreat— are the ones often cited as the main contributor. What I am researching about are the mechanisms provoking those changes in albedo. I am looking at the implications of having the Arctic circulation not “Amplifying” but “Absorbing” increases in water vapour due to atm CO2, triggering; early snowfalls in central Asia, Arctic ice cover meltdown and oceanic increases in salinity and ultimately, the origin of atmospheric blocking patterns and possibly, the pause in T raise.
Arctic and Antarctic circulations behave in a very different way due to its particular asymmetries as consequence of their land/ocean thermal contrasts and Ocean circulation.
All the oscillations considered in atmospheric circulation, PDO, OA, AMO, Solar activity… move around pivoting points. These pivoting points make the impact from those oscillations close to neutral in a long time scale.
We can see that by looking at the gene pool in the evolution of the biological environment which we see today. An environment which has evolved closely thanks to environmental resilience absorbing perturbations originated from those oscillations.
Without resilience, the severity of the variations associated with the oscillations would have not allowed genetic evolution to grow in such a close divergence as we have seen. The climate through latitudes has suffered variations but the global climate has allowed species to develop closely instead of perishing without time for adaptation inducing the generation of new branches of genetic divergence.
Two major components are working side by side in our planet. Passive mechanisms driven by thermodynamic forces transferring energy between components of the ecosystem and, Active processes absorbing, transforming and storing energy throughout biochemical processes.
Consequently, two postures rise in the debate from these two mechanisms:
Are thermodynamics defining the state which allow life to evolve in a changing climate? or, Are biotic systems the ones which develop against thermodynamic fluctuations taming the weather?
October 2015 From SST Anomalies and Heat Waves. Are They Not All Just Heat Displacements? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD) Researchgate: DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23741.05608
“Heat waves” are Increases of temperature over a mean value. They usually are identified by the impact they have over living systems and therefore, are mostly linked with events happening over land. The increase of temperature is produced by a displacement of heat in location being carried by a mass of air. This displacement of heat is recognised as anomalous when moves into a location where induces extreme variation from its average climatic conditions.
Sea Surface Temperature anomalies, like the so called El Niño event, are also Increases of temperature over a mean value. The increase of temperature is produced by a displacement of heat in location being carried by a mass of water. This displacement of heat is recognised as anomalous when moves into a location where induces extreme variation from its average climatic conditions.
So if we call all those events by what they are instead of their acronyms, we can see a common pattern: the distribution of heat at Sea Surface and at Tropospheric level Over Land have suffered variations pointing to anomalous displacements of heat in location and seasonal timing.
That means that not only the state of the atmospheric and oceanic currents have allowed the intrusion of warmer than normal masses of “heat” but also, that the conditions at the location were favourable to also retain the heat.
Based on that point of view I believe that there is a question which has been overlooked. Not only what makes the conditions to induce displacements of heat in location and time, but moreover, which are the conditions which allow those displacements of heat to be transferred and settle in location?
As the First Law of Thermodynamics implies, matter and energy can not be created or destroyed (only converted between the two). Likewise, heat -the movement of energy from a hotter location to a cooler location- is never eliminated, but only moved elsewhere.
And therefore, we have to think on where is the heat being transferred coming from?, and which are the thermal conductivity characteristics of the medium carrying and retaining the heat?
Common sense as a scientific reference.
Same as Rossby waves in the Polar Jet Stream indicates instability in the thermal barriers driving atmospheric circulation, it would be seen as logical that variations in SST (e.g. ENSO) are the result of processes of instability in the thermal conductivity of the Meridional Overturning Circulation (MOC) introducing inconsistencies in the Thermohaline circulation.
It seems that science is facing a challenge in just identifying which process leads the chain reaction and where it does happen. Is it at the atmosphere or in the Ocean, inland due to volcanic activity or outside the planet due to Solar Activity, Equatorial or at the Poles?
The specific heat capacities of water show to make it one of the best substances for holding and transferring heat. So we can consider that any energy entering the Planetary system will mostly be carried by this substance. Now, where is this energy being more actively integrated in climatic processes, in liquid or gas form, at the Oceans or in the Atmosphere?
My interpretation of the behaviour of the Ecosystem as a whole is that the first and fastest medium reacting to the energy entering the system is the atmosphere. And therefore the atmosphere leads, and the events found in the other mediums follow.
Accordingly, the relevant mechanisms to be understood would be those atmospheric mechanisms which trigger changes in the dynamics of the thermodynamic atmosphere. And, from there, the interconnections which trigger the following events, like the Westerlies at the Equatorial Pacific inducing the increase in temperature so called ENSO.
… (follow link at title to see in full)
… Thresholds or Anomalies. Are we chasing ghosts? …
… Settled knowledge. …
From heat waves to water vapour waves
Heat has moved like waves reaching northern latitudes over Europe in an unprecedented manner through this summer
At this part of the year, 15th Oct 2015, we are in the transition from summer to winter, and new types of waves are happening in our atmosphere. This time, these are the waves which carry water vapour into northern latitudes.
Based on previous observations (choose category and look at the posts related or more on thermal conductivity here, applying perspective here and here, climatic drift here, keeping an eye over Atlantic developments here, Pacific developments here, Arctic developments here and here, and Solar activity here) and present conditions, I believe that the driver behind all perturbations and oscillations identified in our planet lies on destabilizing the Arctic circulation from enhancing the capacity of the atmosphere to contain water vapour due to increasing conc of GHGs and aerosols.
… … …
Clouds have still to be understood. And yet, water clouds only exist in our known universe, in our planet, due to one particular situation, that is the concentration of oxygen in the atmosphere. Such concentration is directly linked with the origin and capacity of performance of our biotic systems.
Considering just 2 basic biotic processes being;
- the ones responsible for the concentration of oxygen in the atmosphere and,
- their interaction releasing Cloud nuclei particles enhancing the formation of clouds
The mere identification of seeing numbers of trees decreased over 46% from wild ecosystems being affected through time due to agriculture, urbanization, deforestation, same for soil degradation, decrease in O2 conc, and an increase in GHG, can not be left out of the equation when considering what it is and what it is not “natural variability”, and the future expected for our thermodynamic planetary system.
Our planet is getting fat on GHG, lacking O2, space to breath and capacity to fix and store energy. Biology integrates all components in an ecosystem, yet it is missing in climatology assessments. An AstroBiologist would easily judge a planet with the rates like ours.
Einstein and his developments were mainly applied in physics due to the use that it was made of his work with the aim to manipulate energy in times of conflict, or to understand space. The equation is simple E=mc2. The language of physics has dominated the discussion over physical developments since then and it has been established as the logical translation of climatic developments. However, in the current times, the role of scientific understanding demands to move beyond the barriers of language, either between semantic cultural languages and between disciplines.
Being myself a Biologist involved in Atmospheric dynamics applying physics to explain such a complex subject as it is climatic evolution might seem like the tale of the child claiming that the Emperor has no clothes.
And yet, it seems to me evident that a thermodynamic system as it is our planet, can not scape from the most basic and powerful understanding of our contemporary scientific evolution. If E=MC2, and the anthropogenic activity is increasing the transformation of M into Energy in the system (from burning Mass from fossils and vegetable components, as well as by liberating other forms of energy such as gravimetric in Dams, Solar, transformation of raw materials, etc,) such transformation rate will move the balance in the thermodynamic behaviour of the whole system, and the rate of such deviation from equilibrium will be related with the speed at which the transformation rate between E/M is performed: M>(c)2
An increase in the amount of energy being in “free” state means that kinetic processes will increasingly dominate thermodynamic processes, inducing a transition in our climatic regimes from being driven by Orbital Positioning to be driven by more erratic Kinetic processes.
Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD.
Land Use Change through time.
Examples of processes releasing ENERGY FROM ANTHROPOGENIC ACTIVITIES
There is a point of view missing completely in the debate of climatic developments and atmospheric dynamics.
Everybody seems to be focused on preparedness to face a planetary global warming or cooling phase. It is like if those are the only options. And what it surprises me the most is that either phase is expected to be unidirectional, homogeneous and stratified latitudinally.
Based on past glaciations, cold phases extended the surface covered by ice moving from the Poles towards the equator. But no record shows an extension of reach for cool temperatures while the pole in itself gets warmer.
It seems to me that nobody is considering that there is a new scenario in our planet, a scenario where our planet has never been so bright on its shadow face.
A new scenario where there is a third option from global cooling or global warming, and implies the loss of stratification in the atmosphere. I have wrote about it in my blog and discussed it at linkedin:
I have discussed through my publications that the segmentations between disciplines and standardization over conceptualization, increment the impact from gaps of knowledge contained in each one of the disciplines and static standards and indexes defined.
I have tried to highlight how such impact can be reduced by adopting a more interdisciplinary approach following conceptual assessments instead of relying on standardised patterns based on stats biased on methodological restrictions.
Our biggest problem is not just to become aware of what is relevant that we do not know but equally important is to understand the use and meaning of what we do know.
I have discussed for 4 years an scenario where energetic events in the atmosphere will change in their expression.
In the publication Seasonal Outlook June 2017, I wrote:
“the shape and form for such energetic dynamics can be as surprising as reducing the number of hurricanes (due to the difficulty to condensate energy in a small location) whilst finding more energetic developments at higher latitudes. And if a hurricane forms, it might become unpredictable due to the rapidly changing nature of the environmental characteristics of the atmosphere.”
I don´t know when, where or how these things will happen. I just know that there is an scenario where these developments are not a surprise and I have my own opinion about why.
The continuity in the record of high temperatures in the absence of a strong El Niño phase might suggest the validity of my arguments linking atmospheric Arctic circulation with Equatorial developments as part of a chain reaction through the Atlantic and Pacific Basins resultant of processes in a mixing dynamic. I can only humbly offer my thoughts even knowing that I am in a weak position when compared with renowned scientists with plenty of peer reviewed publications and official support. But I believe that the scenario which my analyses describe is valid and with plenty of potential to explain present and future developments.
Some Animations from previous analyses. (See all at the YouTube channel)
Translatitudinal Energetic/Convective Forcing
Equatorial – Arctic Feedbacks
Global patterns of atmospheric mixing
Heat Displacements and Biotype feedbacks
Climatic Analyses and Atmospheric Developments. A Scenario in transtion towards Mixing Dynamics.
It has been suggested that “More particles in the atmosphere mean more reflective clouds and a cooler climate.”
That is a too simplistic way of looking at it. Different types of airborne particles generate also different types of interaction with the atm. water vapour and other gaseous elements and compounds. There is aerodynamic behaviour, chemical behaviour and thermodynamic behaviour. It has been addressed in sci publications that too many particles of too small size can inhibit rain by retaining water vapour in droplets too small to fall. Which in my research means that the thermal energy contained can be moved around in longer distances. Also, an increase in atm temp allows more water vapour to be contained in the atm so more clouds (and albedo) would be formed by more aerosols “only” if dew point is reached on those particles, which is more difficult to achieve as the temp increases. But, when you reach dew point over an increased conc of aerosols, within a thermically enhanced atmosphere charged of water vapour, all that energy will express itself in different types of forms, with heavy forms of precipitation (snow or pouring rain) and wind events. Like what we have just now over the Iberian peninsula and rain at the Arctic.
Everyone is trying to find a way to put a sticker, a label, which would highlight what it is natural variability and what is not. All my formation and experience has been focused on understanding the triggers of natural processes. Natural processes only “vary” from a “normal” trend when the triggers change.
So, I have offered an extended body of work representing a wide range of assessments exploring those changes in our planet which could be triggers inducing a change in the behaviour of natural processes coalescing into a climatic drift. Those “triggers” can be identified as “significant” changes in the composition and structure of the three phases of our global planetary system, gaseous (composition and structure of the atmosphere), solid (composition and structure of the soils) and liquid (composition and structure of the water bodies). All together with a “significant” deviation in the energy flows previously dominant in our planet, which begun being driven by biochemical photosynthesis and now is becoming dominated by anthropogenic processing.
The changes found in the different part of the ecosystem might not show their “statistical significance” being analysed independently due to many reasons, including methodological bias.
But my question to anyone looking for the ultimate “significant” proof is,
do you think that there has been any period of time in the history of the planet where all these changes in the composition, structure and state of functionality, of all the phases of the ecosystem, have happened at the same time?
is not that enough to make it “statistically significant” as to be a matter of concern considering the feedback coming from the alterations triggered in all the processes with which those phases are linked?
In my research I have been very persistent trying to highlight how much relevance it is given to a small area in size and depth driving global circulation as it is the SST at the Eq Pacific while an area of the same size and even more depth could be identified in the Amazones or by the change suffered in Land cover by agriculture at global scale. Remember that SST are measured in the 5 or less m of the Ocean meanwhile Forests can occupy more than 15 meters in depth. And both are sources of the latent heat carried out in the atmosphere which fuels convective dynamics dominating intrusions over the Arctic. Here you can read three analyses, among the several ones under the category of “Biological Productivity” in the whole project, which were published some time ago studying the impact from changes in Land cover and Biological productivity over atmospheric dynamics.
- December 22, 2014. Biological Productivity, Amazonia and Atmospheric Circulation. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) ResearchGate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10771.99363
- * April 23, 2015 Matching Features Between Land Surface and Atmospheric Circulation (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) ResearchGate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20035.30247. https://wp.me/p403AM-xK
- * June 10, 2016 The Butterfly Effect on Arctic Circulation. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD) https://wp.me/p403AM-12H
Full Index with more than 200 analyses and discussions, and DOIs for reference, can be found at the Timeline page