Winter 2018/19. Seasonal Transitions under a New Climatic Scenario. Follow-Up 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
Follow-up on previous Research.
Seasonal Transitions under a New Climatic Scenario. by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD. June 29, 2018 Pdf registered at ResearchGate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18385.22881
Convective forcing keeps dominating Atmospheric circulation over the NH throughout the transition between 2018-2019.
Previous Analyses related:
|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 13, 2016||Global Mixing in Atmospheric Dynamics (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla Ph.D.) ResearchGate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21255.60320|
|December 17, 2016||Orbital Seasonality vs Kinetic Seasonality. A Change Triggered from Changing the Order of The Factors (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD) Researchgate: DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20129.81760|
|May 5, 2017||Mixing Dynamics keep shaping A Roller coaster of Temperatures over South Europe. Follow-up on previous research 5th May 17. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD) ResearchGate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16627.43043|
|June 9, 2017||“Mixing Dynamics” in the Atmosphere. A follow-up on previous research by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD. ResearchGate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23548.03209|
|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|
|March 14, 2018||Visualising Wind and Convective Forcing Driving Climatic Dynamics. Follow-up 14 March 2018 by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD Pdf available at DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34233.06249|
|April 19, 2018||Climate, Weather and Energy. Using a Climatic Regime to explain Weather Events by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD Research DOI:10.13140/RG.2.2.27923.58406|
|May 23, 2018||Convective Forcing Dominates Atmospheric Circulation NH (By Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD) ResearchGate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23043.20002|
|December 12, 2018||Persistent Mixing Dynamics in Atmospheric Circulation Generates a Seasonal Transition Marked by Kinetic Processes, Exothermic in Nature (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD)|
I have chosen to re-publish these analyses as part of the strategy followed with my work trying to highlight the difference between weather and climate. While weather is a description of the events being unfolded in real-time, climatic developments can be described as the repetition through time of common features shared between weather conditions pointing to new patterns in global circulation and the driving mechanisms behind those. In 2013 and 2014 mainstream media shown that the displacements of cold Arctic masses to mid latitudes were justified by a Polar vortex Broken, active cyclonic circulation over the NH was justified by a strong El Niño forcing and Anom warm temp in the Arctic due to local warm SST. The assessments offered in my line of research discussed the validity of those interpretations pointing to mechanistic processes suggesting a different pattern where all those features are being driven by instead of being drivers of. That is, an increase in convective forcing due to an increasingly energised atmosphere by higher contents of water vapour. The year 2018 is proving to support such assessment with an active circulation, despite the El Niño conditions, warm Arctic driven by mid-latitudinal intrusions and cold displacements without the polar vortex broken. Comparing the analyses from 2014, 2015 and 2016 with 2018 you can see how well those arguments presented match with current developments https://wp.me/p403AM-24F https://wp.me/p403AM-25u https://wp.me/p403AM-267
Weather, Climate, Energy, Environment and Man
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.
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 from the mixing between Cold (Arctic) and warm (Mid-Latitude) masses of air as well as in altitude (SSW).
Subsequently, “temperature” is less reliable than looking at “work” seen even in the “mild” events.
In the framework presented throughout the line of research published in this blog (and researchgate) it has been considered “Climate” as being defined by the amount of energy free to do work. In other words, energy free to promote weather events. Accordingly, in my research I define Climate by the amount and state of energy in circulation, and Weather by the use of this energy.
Consequently, 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.”
In my assessments I have defended that the increase in the energy pool at mid-latitudes would ultimately create an scenario with an overcharged atmosphere. That would reduce the contrasts with which to create and maintain stability in the structure required to condense energy in singular events, like hurricanes. Giving more relevance to the single contrast between Ocean/continental masses. At the same time, the opening of the Arctic circulation through a weak Jet Stream would reduce the pressure in the containment absorbing the condensation of energy at mid-latitudes, expanding into a new volume.
Accordingly, hadley circulation gets affected (see also) generating new patterns of turbulence at the ITCZ as well as it gets influenced Arctic mixing zones with lower latitudes.
In this scenario cyclones are generated under an increase in the mixing ratio of an unstable atmospheric circulation dominated by kinetic energy transferred by water vapour thanks to GHGs, and immersed in an overcharged atmosphere with no place where to diffuse its energy, becoming resilient as long as they stay over the ocean. So they endure like a piece of an ice rock in cold water.
The convective force pushing from Mid-Latitudes into Arctic circulation has shown throughout the transition between Autumn to Winter 2018/19 to be persistent through time in the last years, and strong enough to displace Arctic masses of air from high latitudes into mid-latitudes and even disrupt the stratospheric circulation. All the symptoms expected under the scenario described in the line of research presented.
About Sea Surface Temperatures, my assessments take SST as subsequent conditions driven by wind shear. So the interaction between masses of air in circulation allows or inhibits SST developments. Once the scenario is built on SST this becomes a “battle field” conditioning the subsequent interaction between the following masses of air and the characteristics of the “grounds” where the game will be played (sort of speak). Like the effect of the ice conditions in an ice hockey match.
El Niño is an event which happens in a very small portion of the Earth, it is related to the temperature of a very thin layer of the Ocean in depth, a small percentage of the area occupied by the whole Oceanic masses, and even smaller when it is integrated in the multidimensional space combining Ocean and atmosphere. It is kind of intriguing to think why it has been so easy to conclude that such small portion of the entire system is driving it as a whole. It is like considering that the flowering of plants drives the seasons. Similarly it could be said about using SST at the Arctic to justify altogether; the lack of ice, warmer temperatures at tropospheric level and even at stratospheric level. There is not enough energy in the SST of such small area as it is the Arctic to justify all those convective dynamics.
(March 22, 2016 Pacific atmospheric dynamics with and without a positive ENSO (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD) Reasearchgate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.1968.5521).
Statistical Significance. The Scary Side of Being Mild (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD) ResearchGate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21934.61767
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 Amazon or by the change suffered in Land cover by agriculture at global scale.
We have to consider 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.
Analyses which I published in my line of research some time ago studying the impact from changes in Land cover over atmospheric dynamics:
- 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
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.
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
The main conclusion from more than 200 analyses and discussions 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)
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.
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 Seasonal and Climatic regimes from being driven by Orbital Positioning to be driven by more erratic Kinetic processes.
This year 2018 the progression of the climatic indexes and atmospheric dynamics seen show to support the conclusions discussed throughout all the analyses performed in the line of research presented in this blog:
- The ENSO is not a driver of convective forcing over the NH,
- Convective forcing from Mid-latitudinal towards the Arctic circulation has wear off the gradients of temperature generating a strong Polar Jet Stream.
- Arctic warming occurs through atmospheric intrusions from Mid Latitudes,
- The collapse of the Polar Jet Stream has opened Arctic circulation to Mid-Latitudinal circulation intrusions allowing Trans-Arctic circulation between Pacific and Atlantic Basins.
- The global Temperature measured is the resultant of mixing patterns in the atmosphere,
- Therefore an increase in mixing dynamics creates a pause in temperature raise,
- An increase in mixing dynamics show an increase in convective forcing,
- Convective forcing is the work resultant from an increase in atmospheric energy being incorporated in free state,
- The incorporation and spread of energy in free state into the atmosphere is carried and released by water vapour
- An increase of water vapour in atmospheric circulation requires an increase in the thermal capacity of the atmosphere
- The process of enhancing the thermal capacity of the atmosphere comes by increasing the concentration of GHGs, conc of aerosols and land surface albedo.
- Several processes carried out by human activity are linked with the previous assessment: human activity reduces the capacity of the biotic environment to fix energy from free state into inert state by reducing biochemical processing and storage (CxHxOx photosynthesis and biomass) and increases atmospheric concentrations of GHGs by releasing CO2 and H2O into the atmosphere. Also, land use and cover transformations increase albedo, industrial activities increase aerosols and the compartmentalization of water affects water cycles.
- In a thermodynamic system the energetic pool is the sum of the amount of energy in free state capable of doing work, and the energy fixed in an inert form as part of mass. The amount of energy in free state is proportional to the amount of energy fixed in inert form as mass (E=mc2). The release of energy from its inert form increases the amount of energy in free state to do work. Energy is not created, neither destroyed. The transformation of the three phases of the environment forced by human activities, gaseous (atmosphere), liquid (water cycle) and solid (land use and cover), increases the amount of energy in free state capable of promoting all forms of work; convective forcing, strong winds, solid and liquid precipitation, lightning, dust storms, heat waves, cold displacements, and ultimately, and increase in atmospheric mixing in altitude and across latitudes.
See full line of research with an index for all 200+ analyses published in chronological order since 2013 at the main page diegofdezsevilla.wordpress.com
In research what it is relevant it is not always what it is New, but what it doesn´t get old. One stage of research comes when looking into offering something New; New data, New interpretations, New methods, making “the News”, being the First … And then, once the “New” has been offered, it is all about confirmation, re-evaluation, validation, review and application. In my line of research, at one stage I have offered New interpretations on climatic developments adopting New points of view addressing New synergistic interactions delivering New Conclusions and Implications in weather patterns, atmospheric circulation and biotic performance. In a following stage I have re-shared all those previous “New assessments” to be contrasted against real time developments been unfolded in the next years. 4 years ago I was told: “The topic you’ve written about is extremely complicated and many of your statements have not yet been verified by peer-reviewed research.” I was challenged for a deeper understanding of the state of the research, knowledge of atmospheric dynamics and analyses supporting my statements.
After 200+ analyses 2014-18, have I done enough? diegofdezsevilla.wordpress.com
LinkedIn feedback diegofdezsevilla
Seasonal Transitions under a New Climatic Scenario
From previous publications and assessments (see dates of publication and follow links at the titles to access the publications in full):
|October 21, 2014||From previous analysis: New theory proposal to assess possible changes in Atmospheric Circulation (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD) Researchgate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.4859.3440…The theory of Arctic Amplification has introduced the considerations over feedback effects associated with temperature, water vapour and clouds due to changes in the surface albedo feedback—the increase in surface absorption of solar radiation when snow and ice retreat—often cited as the main contributor. The theory that I have developed follows “in alignment” with the work published previously by scientists Judah Cohen, Masato Mori, Colin Summerhayes, Coumou and Ted Shepherd. Their work supported the theory of that early snowfall over Asia increases albedo leading to heat retention in the atmosphere provoking Arctic ice to melt. Their approach point to decreasing snow cover as the cause diminishing albedo enhancing heat absorption. Ultimately, their approach theorize that such enhanced capacity of the Arctic to absorb heat would lead to “amplify” atmospheric heat absorption already being fuelled with GHGs. And therefore, such increase in atmospheric temperature would reduce the thermal contrast required for a strong jet stream and consequently originating disturbance in atmospheric weather patterns associated.
What I propose with my hypothesis is that the so called “Arctic Amplification” is a synchronic consequence altogether with other environmental phenomena (ENSO, NAO, etc…) and not the trigger. I defend that “Arctic Amplification” is a symptom and not a causation of atmospheric dynamics. Arctic circulation does not amplify a process but on the contrary, it reflects the consequence of absorbing the influence from mid-latitude conditions. (updates can be found in the category polar vortex and jet stream. 26/04/2016)
What I am trying to highlight in my theory are the possible mechanisms which would explain: changes in albedo which support the concept of “Arctic Amplification”, early snowfalls in central Asia, Arctic ice cover meltdown and oceanic increases in salinity and ultimately, the origin of atmospheric blocking patterns and a slow down or “pause” in T raise, unified in single principle: Increasing conc. of CO2 and water vapour induce a decrease in the differential gradients of energy in atmospheric circulation.
I am looking at the implications of having the Arctic circulation not “Amplifying” but “Absorbing” constant increases in atm CO2 and Water vapour. In my approach, instead of looking at what happens in the Arctic as the origin of a chain reaction, I look at what happens in the Arctic just as a side effect (with its own implications) of a more wide process resultant from a reduction between the differential gradients of energy driving the atmospheric global circulation, being water vapour the carrier of the energy being dispersed all over the atmosphere.
|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.2.1.2500.0488The observed atmospheric circulation at 250 hPa and at 10hPa contributes to support my theory of being the consequence of having a decrease in the differential gradient of energy dictating atmospheric circulation due to a broader distribution of energy in altitude and latitude carried by an increasing amount of atmospheric GHGs and water vapour.The first law of thermodynamics points to that Energy cannot be created or destroyed, it can only be changed from one form to another. Therefore energy can be stored (e.g. Biochemically through photosynthesis into carbon based fuels), transformed (e.g. from chemical to kinetic like the explosion of dynamite) and transferred (e.g. from kinetic energy carried by the wind triggered by adiabatic processes to mechanical energy moving a turbine in a windmill).
Our atmosphere carries energy in different forms:
The second law of thermodynamics points to that adding energy into an isolated thermodynamic system, like our atmosphere, would induce increases in entropy as a consequence of dissipation of energy and to dispersal of matter and energy.
The state of maximum entropy of the atmosphere would be both a uniform temperature and a uniform pressure worldwide. Clearly that is not the arrangement that we see, the atmosphere is much more complex than that. There is a systematic decrease in temperature as we move away from the equator towards the poles, and superimposed on that a complex and ever changing pattern of weather systems, with storms, high pressure regions, low pressure regions, pressure gradients, gales, etc., etc. All of these represent a high degree of order (a decrease in entropy) when compared to the uniform condition.
A constant introduction of GHGs and Water vapour in the atmosphere would induce an increase in different forms of energy. An increase in heat stored by GHGs would increase temperature, an increase of water vapour would increase rain fall and, an increase in heat from GHGs and latent heat from water vapour would induce stronger winds in adiabatic processes. All this energy will start to be accumulated close to the source, getting dissipated firstly by local atmospheric circulation. Such scenario could be comparable with the “heat urban effect”. Similarly, the accumulation and dissipation of those forms of energy would generate climatic events near the source, the troposphere. (more discussion in previous post Looking at the influence of continentality in atmospheric circulation. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
Increases in atmospheric CO2 have being claimed to store energy in the form of heat raising the temperature of the atmosphere. Accordingly, such development would induce the atmosphere to expand allowing more water vapour to be contained. CO2 storing heat and water vapour carrying latent heat and molecular mass add altogether energy in different forms which, in turn, fuel adiabatic processes, weather events and atmospheric circulation.
When considering global circulation, there are patterns of circulation which are built upon strong differential gradients of energy. Warm humid air from tropical or sub-polar regions getting in contact with cold dry air from Polar regions, under the Coriolis effect triggered by the rotation of the Earth, create a current in form of a Jet around the Pole (Lat. 60N) moving from West to East in the North Hemisphere, being called The Polar Jet Stream.
In the first instance, it could be assumed that increasing heat and water vapour contained between the Equator and sub-polar regions would increase the differential gradient of energy between sub-polar and polar atmospheric circulation, increasing the strength of the Jet Stream. That would keep concentrated and isolated cold masses of air from sub-polar circulation. Accordingly, the difference between atmospheric temperature in the Pole and in the Equator would be high and increase with more GHGs.
However, following the second law of thermodynamics, the close contact and persistence of such area of contact would induce in time, an increase in the percentage of air getting exchanged from both atmospheric areas. That scenario would develop a decrease in the difference between Polar and Equatorial temperatures. Situation which can be already observed in the records available.
Here I hypothesise that it can be considered that the volume of the atmospheric system accommodating increasing conc. of GHGs and water vapour has expanded from sub-polar regions into Polar Circulation. Consequently, following the second law of thermodynamics, an added space for those gasses to expand would allow for the atmosphere containing GHGs and water vapour to retain more heat with no increase in atmospheric temperature. Which it could explain why under increasing concentrations of atmospheric CO2 there has been a so called “pause” in global warming.
Increasing amounts of atmospheric CO2 and Water vapour would incorporate forms of energy not only into cyclonic events, increasing its strength, but also it would increment the energy in the atmosphere around it. A scenario in which the difference between the energy carried by an atmospheric event and the atmosphere surrounding it is high, the energy in a cyclonic event would dissipate faster, losing strength and resilience. However, we can see in the North Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, cyclonic and anticyclonic events building what it has being called “blocking patterns”, growing from near surface level (1000 hPa) to levels as high as the Jet Stream (250 hPa).
For all of these reasons, I see a reasonable link between the recent observed disturbance in the atmospheric circulation of the Jet Stream, without the Polar Vortex being broken yet, and the possibility of being the result of a decrease in the differential gradients of energy between cyclonic events and atmospheric barriers like the Jet Stream. Under such scenario, the Jet stream loses stability becoming wobbly, allowing more frequent exchange of masses of air between both cold and warm sides. (for more discussion in this topic see previous post (Updated 19_Nov) A Groundhog forecast on climate at the North Hemisphere. New theory proposal to assess possible changes in Atmospheric Circulation (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla).
(it continues… see full analysis following link at the title or here)
|February 10, 2015||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 Cohen et al.2011 proposed that early snowfall over Asia increases albedo leading to heat retention in the atmosphere provoking Arctic ice to melt and create heat absorption leading to jet stream weakening due to Arctic Amplification in atm heat absorption. (Other arguments behind the Arctic Amplification rely on anomalous warm Arctic SST temperatures to justify Arctic Dynamic in atm circulation.) I believe that all of that is a consequence and not the trigger. That is a symptom and not the cause. In August 2014 Cohen et al, published a review over the state of knowledge on climatic research: DOI:10.1038/NGEO2234 “studies on related topics, especially other observational studies, share some of the same shortcomings: lack of statistical significance, causality unclear, incomplete mechanistic understanding, and so on”.
In October 2014 I published my theoretical explanation over the mechanism driving climatic alterations.
I am looking at the implications of having the Arctic circulation not “Amplifying” but “Absorbing” constant increases in atm CO2 and Water vapour. In my approach, instead of looking at what happens in the Arctic as the origin of a chain reaction, I look at what happens in the Arctic just as a side effect (with its own implications) of a more wide process resultant from a reduction between the differential gradients of energy driving the atmospheric global circulation, being water vapour the carrier of the energy being dispersed all over the atmosphere.
In December 2014 I shared my theory and my point of view with Prof Jennifer Francis by email. She replied saying: “the topic you’ve written about is extremely complicated and many of your statements have not yet been verified by peer-reviewed research. You will need statements supported by published (or your own) analysis, (not just suggestive examples and anecdotal evidence)“
Following Jennifer comments I offer a review over the theory that I have proposed with new analyses.
My theory tries to find common ground to explain the cause leading to Arctic amplification, blocking patterns associated to deep cyclonic events, a pause in atmospheric T raise, increase in kinetic energy dispersed over the whole hemisphere, water flash floods, as well as frequent trans-equatorial circulation between hemispheres at jet stream level.
Throughout several posts in my blog, I have explored the connections between Solar activity, Biological productivity, Polar vortex, Environmental Resilience, Inland Water Bodies and Water Cycle, Energy Balance and the Influence of Continentality on Extreme Climatic Events.
Based on my analyses I have developed a theory about what I believe it has induced an increase in atmospheric water vapor content and, further I discuss its implications in atmospheric circulation, Jet Stream behaviour and weather system’s patterns.
Based on my previous research published in this blog and, the arguments pointed out in various assessment, the implications of having the Arctic circulation not “Amplifying” but “Absorbing” constant increases in atm CO2 and Water vapour defines what is happening at the Arctic just as a side effect (with its own implications) of a more wide process resultant from a reduction between the differential gradients of energy driving the atmospheric global circulation (e.g. inducing a weak Polar Jet Stream), being water vapour the carrier of the energy being dispersed all over the atmosphere, in latitude and altitude.
The most significant features indicating the potential validity of this theory are:
Notice that the most predominant entrance of water vapour into high latitudes happens in the North Atlantic.
Persistent patterns in atmospheric circulation carrying water vapour in the NH Pacific have repeated similar to those from last year’s winter: 2014 Feb and Oct. 2015 Nov, Dec, Feb and March.
… (see full analysis at source following link at the title)
|March 7, 2015||Drops of Weather. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD) (pdf) DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33796.63360The possibility of facing a weakening Jet Stream due to a decrease in the Thermal contrast between the Subtropical and Polar atmospheric regions has created scenarios in which the variations in meteorological conditions for a particular location can come without a transition. One week is freezing cold and the next pretty warm. How can that happen?The large north-south waves in the jet stream (Rossby waves) are occurring more frequently and may be increasing in amplitude. Larger waves can cause cool air to be pushed toward the equator when the waves dip to low latitudes, and warm air to be pushed toward the poles when the waves swing back. For areas on the ground below these waves, that translates into wild and unseasonable temperature extremes, sometimes called “weather whiplash.”
Such scenario can be seen when we look at the graphic representations created to simulate the prediction for the Western European meteorological conditions in the period between the 3rd of March and the 14th of March 2015.
Here I have created a video with the sequence of images generated for this period so you can appreciate the forecast describing the behaviour of the phase/limit where both masses of air get in contact and how it looks like a fluid releasing “drops of weather”.
(Western Europe. Meteorological forecast for the period between the 3rd of March and the 14th of March 2015. Subjected to changes due to updating processes.)
|March 7, 2015||The implications raising from such type of atmospheric behaviour are yet to be fully understood. To begin with, the possibility of having sudden intrusions of masses of air inducing extreme changes in meteorological variables might affect the life cycle of the biota since the most of it, plants and animals, follows changes on Temp and Humidity suffering behavioural, hormonal and physiological alterations. Also it must be considered the rapid respond to those variables from species with a quick metabolism. Many of which, insects and fungi, might suffer blooming rates of growth coinciding with a vulnerable stage in the development of other species like crops and wild plants. This scenario opens questions which I believe are worth to be included in a debate about “the possibility of seeing its frequency increasing in the near future”. Also discussed in previous posts e.g. (UPGRADED 11 March2015) Revisiting the theory of “Facing a decrease in the differential gradients of energy in atmospheric circulation” by Diego Fdez-Sevilla.)
Sudden changes in temperature might induce flowering too early or, getting affected by frostbite, depending on whether the intrusion carries warm or cold air.
I leave here one example from a paper which tackles such kind of scenarios for plants looking at the implications that raising uncertainties carry into the system of production for the food industry and agricultural practices. …(see full publication following link at the title).
|May 14, 2015||A roller-coaster of temperatures in South Europe. Spain (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD) Pdf DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27634.20165A new record maximum temperature for Spain was set yesterday 13th May, with many local records also broken, and the heat continues today (14th May) in the southeast (Temp on 14th May: All-Time May Heat Record for Europe Falls For the 2nd Time This Month.By: Jeff Masters. May 14, 2015).
The new record of 42.6C was recorded at Lanzarote Airport in the Canary Islands, beating the previous May record for Spain by a relatively large 2.5 degrees. It also beats the Lanzarote station’s own previous highest May temperature by a whopping 6 degrees.
The previous May record in Spain was 40.1C at Cordoba on the mainland, and Cordoba itself recorded a new May station record on Wednesday with 41.2C.
Further records could be broken today in parts of Andalucía, Murcia and Valencia as air continues to feed in from North Africa. However, a cold front is pushing gradually southeastwards across Spain, bringing cooler air across much of the country by the end of the week.
Well, next we have the forecast for a sudden drop of Temp in just 24 hours and even moving to freezing (0ºC) on Wednesday 20th May.
Starting from Wednesday May 20th polar-maritime air masses will flow towards Spain, with drops in temperature being forecast reaching as low as 0ºC in some parts of the North of Spain (2m Temp Forecast GFS).
I believe that the Iberian peninsula can be a very relevant indicator for the potential evolution of global changes in atmospheric developments and climatic anomalies, due to its position in Latitude and conglomeration of contrasts in a relatively small space of climatic influences, from Oceanic and maritime in the West and East to continental from North Europe, and Africa in the South. Cold blasts have found their way South in Winter and burning Heat has no opposition moving North now 14th May. And these anomalies are not Solar related by activity or angle of incidence (see also Orbital Seasonality vs Kinetic Seasonality).
Follow up from previous posts:
This type of situations brings back some previous discussions addressed in several analyses in which I have pointed out the relevance of facing changes in the severity for the transition between climatic phases due to atmospheric alterations (see full index at timeline page).
From: New theory proposal to assess possible changes in Atmospheric Circulation (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) October 21, 2014 DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.4859.3440
The theory that I have developed follows the work published previously by scientists Judah Cohen, Masato Mori, Colin Summerhayes, Coumou and Ted Shepherd, whom all together supported the theory of that early snowfall over Asia increases albedo leading to heat retention in the atmosphere provoking Arctic ice to melt. Decreased snow cover decreases albedo and enhance heat absorption. Ultimately, the enhanced capacity of the Arctic to absorb heat would lead to “amplify” atmospheric heat absorption already being fuelled with GHGs. Such increase in atmospheric temperature would reduce the thermal contrast required for a strong jet stream and consequently originating disturbance in atmospheric weather patterns associated.
What I propose with my hypothesis is that Arctic Amplification is a consequence and not the trigger. That it is a symptom and not the cause.
What I am trying to highlight in my theory are the possible mechanisms which would explain: changes in albedo which support Arctic Amplification, early snowfalls in central Asia, Arctic ice cover meltdown and oceanic increases in salinity and ultimately, the origin of atmospheric blocking patterns and the pause in T raise unified in single principle: Increasing conc. of CO2 and water vapour induce a decrease in the differential gradients of energy in atmospheric circulation.
I am looking at the implications of having the Arctic circulation not “Amplifying” but “Absorbing” constant increases in atm CO2 and Water vapour. In my approach, instead of looking at what happens in the Arctic as the origin of a chain reaction, I look at what happens in the Arctic just as a side effect (with its own implications) in a wider process resultant from a reduction between the differential gradients of energy driving the atmospheric global circulation, being water vapour the carrier of the energy being dispersed all over the atmosphere.”
Based on my theory, Greenhouse gases store energy which leads to an increase in global temperature. This increase in T, altogether with synergistic effects from aerosols, allows more water vapor to be contained in the atmosphere, which, consequently, adds more energy into the atmosphere in form of latent heat and kinetic energy. Therefore, this increase in atmospheric energy being carried and distributed all over the hemisphere would infuse power into atmospheric patterns at the same time that it would also reduce the differential energetic gradient between cyclonic events and their surroundings in order to dissipate the energy carried within. Consequently, the energy of those cyclonic events (Low and High pressures) would persist throughout time, altitude and location. Such scenario would decrease the strength of barriers built upon steep differential gradients like the Polar Jet Stream. Furthermore, it would increase the frequency in which masses of warm air from low latitudes would get introduced in polar regions as well as masses of polar air would move across the Jet Stream, across latitudes, moving further South. Following the 2nd Thermodynamics law on entropy, having decreased the differential in gradient of energy between cyclonic events and its surroundings would increase the life span of those events. That would induce an increase in the accumulation of energy in form of latent heat, water vapour and wind strength. Such build-up in power, without dissipating the energy contained within, would give cyclonic events enough strength to interfere with atmospheric barriers like the Polar Jet Stream, breaking it, and also, would allow them to adopt locations that originate “blocking patterns.”
From: 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) November 14, 2014 DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2500.0488
“Even considering that such exchange it has been always there throughout past Winters, if my theory is right, this pattern of unsteady Jet Stream and masses of air crossing through would start earlier in Autumn (seasonal transition to Winter) and resume closer to summer (until all warm masses of air cover high latitudes homogeneously, coalescence).
The transition from Summer to Winter and from Winter to Summer will be a transition between “more frequent exchange of masses of air” to “less frequent”. Instead of having a constant gradual change in atmospheric conditions, we will have pockets of air moving across the Jet stream defining the weather wherever they move.”
From: Revisiting the theory of “Facing a decrease in the differential gradients of energy in atmospheric circulation” by Diego Fdez-Sevilla. Posted on February 10, 2015. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.1975.7602
In October 2014 a new theoretical approach was proposed in the line of research published in this blog able to explain changes in atmospheric dynamics capable of triggering a climatic drift. In order to contrast the accuracy of the assessments and conclusions offered with real time developments I revisited those by looking at the atmospheric dynamics observed throughout the Winter 2014-15.
The results reached support the validity of the theoretical approach proposed and the foreseen consequences: “The common feature observed by the theory of Arctic Amplification and the theory of Energetic Gradients (proposed in the present line of research) share one single form of perspective over the behaviour of the Polar Jet Stream: the weakening of the Jet Stream would allow more frequent intrusions of masses of air from both sides, inducing sudden and extreme changes in weather patterns for Northern and Southern latitudes. Once the barrier weakens, “warm and wet” currents of air would reach further North being dragged by High pressures moving at higher latitudes without the opposition of the Jet Stream.”
However, the theory of Energetic Gradients instead of seeing albedo or SST at Arctic altitudes as the trigger for atmospheric dynamics offers a new perspective where *Such dynamic are the result of an increase in energy being dispersed (water vapour) and contained (Permanent Greenhouse Gases and aerosols) throughout the atmosphere using water vapour as the carrier. Ultimately, mid-latitudinal “convective forcing” dominates over “orbital configurations” inducing an increase in the mixing ratio between masses of air previously compartmentalised through latitude and altitude. The changing force driving such energetic pulse could come from seeing an increase in the pool of energy in its free state as consequence of human activities transforming the global environment in its three phases; gaseous, liquid and solid. end update.
From: Drops of Weather. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) March 7, 2015
“The implications raising from such type of atmospheric behaviour are yet to be fully understood. To begin with, the possibility of having sudden intrusions of masses of air inducing extreme changes in meteorological variables might affect the life cycle of the biota since the most of it, plants and animals, follows changes on Temp and Humidity suffering behavioural, hormonal and physiological alterations. Also it must be considered the rapid respond to those variables from species with a quick metabolism. Many of which, insects and fungi, might suffer blooming rates of growth coinciding with a vulnerable stage in the development of other species like crops and wild plants. This scenario opens questions which I believe are worthy to be included in a debate about “the possibility of its increasing frequency in the near future”, also discussed in previous posts (UPGRADED 11 March2015) Revisiting the theory of “Facing a decrease in the differential gradients of energy in atmospheric circulation” by Diego Fdez-Sevilla.)“
Throughout my career I have studied and discussed the influence of atmospheric water vapour in the aerodynamic behaviour of one particle being part of the aerosol, pollen grains. In my research I already pointed out the need for further research about the implications of the biological atmospheric particle load by being involved in climate events through the microphysics of cloud formation due to the nuclei drop activity of such particles. Aerodynamics_of_pollen_grains_involved_in_sampling_efficiency. Thesis_by_Diego_Fernandez-Sevilla (2007)
Additionally, I also performed research about the impact that environmental heat increase and retention has in the atmospheric biological load due to the urban heat island effect. The results point out that the biological cycles of the biota are altered increasing the duration of their “pollen release” period (due to prolonged warm climatic conditions). The scenario created by the urban heat island effect has been already applied to extrapolate global climatic alterations in the biota suggesting an increase in plant performance (metabolism) inducing more bioaerosol released into the atmosphere.
I first presented this work at conferences in Turku 2008. Later published as: Assessment between pollen seasons in areas with different urbanization level related to local vegetation sources and differences in allergen exposure. Aerobiologia, Vol 26-1, 1-14. (2010)
Putting together my own experience in researching bioaerosols, my understanding of environmental processes and the findings by others I find enough dots connected to be very alert about the synergistic effects that the biota play and suffers as part of the whole system. For more about this topic you can check the links below and the posts from the categories at the top of this page (e.g. posts addressing the synergies between atmospheric events and Biological productivity.)
|May 13, 2016||Another roller-coaster of temperatures in South Europe. Spain (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD) May 13, 2016 … (see full article following the link here)|
|March 3, 2016||Extracted from the publication: Seasonality Spring 2016. Continuous follow-up on my previous research assessing atmospheric dynamics. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD) (follow link here to see whole publication) pdf DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2833.8968Seasonality is a characteristic of a time series in which the data experiences regular and predictable changes which recur every calendar year. Any predictable change or pattern in a time series that recurs or repeats over a one-year period can be said to be seasonal.
The current situation through Feb/March 2016 in the atmospheric dynamics driving seasonality from Winter to Spring is bringing some interesting points around, and many of them are consistent with the developments expected from the line of research followed in this blog. So I want to share in this post the main principles which drive the standard interpretation of seasonality, the new outcomes from current conditions and the coherences found with my previous research published in this blog (and researchgate).
Seasonality as we know it
Every planet in our solar system has seasons. But the seasons that occur on other planets are extremely different from the traditional spring, summer, fall and winter weather that we experience here on Earth. Despite what may seem like great variations in temperature, weather and climactic conditions in different places around the globe, in reality there actually is little variation in Earth’s overall climate. Why?
There are several factors that affect the weather on the planets. Those factors are defined by two major characteristics.
The astrological interactions derived from the planet’s (Earth) position, shape and motion:
And, the presence/absence and composition of a significant atmosphere.
Earth’s axis is tilted about 23 degrees, causing the latitude of the Sun to vary from 23 degrees north of the equator at the beginning of northern summer to 23 degrees south of the equator at the beginning of northern winter. On Earth, that tilt is the primary reason for the differences in weather we observe between summer and winter. Planets with smaller tilts might have smaller weather variations; planets with larger tilts could have more extreme variations.
Our orbit is nearly circular, so there is little variation in Earth’s overall climate, averaged over both northern and southern hemispheres. But other planets have more elliptical orbits, and therefore their seasonal variations in weather are much different than what we experience. We are much further from the Sun than Mercury or Venus, but closer than the other six planets. Generally, weather variations are more pronounced for those planets closer to the Sun.
The terms “summer” and “winter” tend to be Earth-oriented terms but can be applied to the other planets as well. When the North Pole of any planet is tilted toward the sun, astronomers call it the Summer Solstice; when the South Pole is tilted toward the sun it’s called the Winter Solstice.
The climate of our planet is the result of three main factors: solar energy, the greenhouse effect, and atmospheric and oceanic circulation. In addition, the geographic and seasonal variations in solar energy are determined by the curvature of the Earth, the inclination of its axis and its orbit around the Sun. These factors produce different climatic zones, which in turn affect the distribution of plant, animal and human populations. (ref link)
The Sun is the central star of our solar system, which consists of 8 planets: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune.The “surface” of the Sun is very hot, with a temperature of about 6,000 degrees Celsius. Due to its position, neither too near nor too far from the Sun, the Earth is the only planet in the solar system that can host abundant life, in particular because its average surface temperature of 15 degrees Celsius enables the presence of liquid water. Solar energy and the presence of an atmosphere are the two main elements that condition the Earth’s temperature. Like the glass panels of a greenhouse, certain gases that are naturally present in the atmosphere, notably water vapor and carbon dioxide, trap heat from the sun, maintaining this mild average temperature on the planet’s surface. This natural phenomenon is called the greenhouse effect. Without it, the surface temperature of the Earth would be –18 degrees Celsius and life, if any life could be sustained, would be quite different.
Our atmosphere’s natural greenhouse effect is thus a beneficial phenomenon, without which life as we know it would not be possible. The greenhouse effect is often mentioned in the news as a dangerous phenomenon, but what really is dangerous is the intensification of the natural greenhouse effect.
Current conditions (march 3, 2016). When the Old news become New news. Follow-up from my previous research.
The current situation through Feb/March 2016 in the atmospheric dynamics driving seasonality from Winter to Spring is bringing some interesting points around, and many of them are consistent with the developments expected from the line of research followed in this blog.
The coldest part of a day cycle comes after the higher amount of hours in the dark, just before sunrise. The coldest part of the orbital cycle at the NH should be when we crossed over the winter solstice in Dec, and yet there is not enough differential in thermal contrast from low temp in the Arctic to build up a steady Polar Jet Stream.
One repeated feature in atmospheric dynamics which I have observed since the beginning of my research in 2013 is the frequent intrusion of masses of air trespassing from both sides the barrier which should represent the Polar Jet Stream.
It is becoming a frequent scenario to see the displacement of cold air from the Arctic due to convective forcing from warmer masses of air getting into high latitudes and altitudes. The consequence from such dynamics is the alteration in the form, length and transition between seasons.
Follow-up from previous research published in this blog
This type of situations brings back some previous discussions addressed in several posts, in which I have point out the relevance of facing changes in the severity for the transition between climatic phases due to atmospheric alterations.
Based on my observations and analyses since 2013, in 2014 I made an assessment over the atmospheric dynamics driving the weather systems across the NH which led me to propose a theoretical approach which could explain new developments in climatic drifts.
In the following paragraphs I share bits of some of the most relevant publications addressing the coherence found between those and the current conditions. The whole work behind this piece of research is built by 120 posts addressing synergistic interactions from a multidisciplinary approach. Altogether they make a Theoretical Framework, a Conceptual Framework and an Assessment Framework on global environmental issues, addressing methodological approaches to fill in or find out gaps of knowledge, the title of this blog.
Therefore you should follow links or explore the blog in order to get deeper insight on any aspect you feel missing (from the influence of solar activity, aerosols, human waste, etc…). Also you will find videos with graphic representation of my work at youtube.
|March 3, 2016||continues from the publication: Seasonality Spring 2016. Continuous follow-up on my previous research assessing atmospheric dynamics. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) (follow link here to see whole publication)
Follow-up from previous research presented in this blog
From A Climate “Between Waters” (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla). September 8, 2015. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.1697.5847
I believe that the present weather events, altogether with the tornado seen in Venice on July, represent some of the new “Drops of Weather” coming over to say that the Summer, as we know it, is coming to an end.
The reason behind it seems to be the sporadic and unpredictable behaviour of the Jet stream, which not only is wobbly in latitude, but also in the vertical profile of the atmosphere. Accordingly, we can see that when it comes to lower levels from 300hPa induces alterations in the thermodynamical behaviour of the tropospheric circulation. In turn, when this cold air touches the lower level of our atmosphere, activates the energy accumulated in the Water vapour contained in it as latent heat, delivering new forms of energy; kinetic provoking strong winds, electrostatic generating lightnings and potential carried in the mass of all the water coming from its gaseous state into liquid or solid precipitation.
I have already discussed what is my theory about what it is happening that it is generating such a wobbly jet stream in latitude and altitude. This theory was published in a previous post and it points out the incorporation of masses of water vapour into polar latitudes as consequence of CO2 forcing as the cause wearing out the strength of the Polar Jet Stream.
I also have suggested that such incorporation of masses of water vapour into Polar Latitudes follow channels which are linked with persistent cyclonic events in the Atlantic and the Pacific. The present patterns seen in the circulation over the Pacific and the Atlantic are consistent with those proposed in this theory.
Ultimately, if this theory is right and weather patterns are incorporating water vapour into Polar latitudes, it would affect:
Most definitely, I believe that the climate in our Earth is what it lies between waters. Between cold waters and warms waters, between waters in the atmosphere or those in the ground inland or at the oceans. Altogether, our climate lies on those processes moving energy between waters in the form of gas, liquid or solid.
Data available supporting previous assessments
An international team of university and NASA scientists examined the relationship between changes in surface temperature and vegetation growth from 45 degrees north latitude to the Arctic Ocean. Results show temperature and vegetation growth at northern latitudes now resemble those found 4 degrees to 6 degrees of latitude farther south as recently as 1982.
“Higher northern latitudes are getting warmer, Arctic sea ice and the duration of snow cover are diminishing, the growing season is getting longer and plants are growing more,” said Ranga Myneni of Boston University’s Department of Earth and Environment. “In the north’s Arctic and boreal areas, the characteristics of the seasons are changing, leading to great disruptions for plants and related ecosystems.”
The study was published March 10, 2013 in the journal Nature Climate Change.
The missing links
The transition from facing changes at a regional scale into changes at global scale only takes to have enough regional changes to coalescence. And that applies to all parts of the ecosystem, changes in the liquid phase (Oceans), the solid or terrestrial and the gaseous/the atmosphere.
What we see is a pattern in thermodynamic circulation and biotic reaction.
Plant cover over the Arctic will increase the potential for the atmosphere to retain water vapour through evapotranspiration so it becomes a positive feedback reaction towards extending the influence of the warmer masses of air transported from mid latitudes into polar circulation.
That will increase the amount of energy that the atmosphere can hold and spread over the whole Hemisphere and beyond Equatorial limits extending to the South Hemisphere. There, water vapour will face the contrast from the non-existence of continentality so ice would increase like frost over the Antarctica. However, the Ocean circulation will be affected interacting with such transport creating a new scenario full of contrasts.
But that is just an opinion, my opinion.
About “applying Stefan Boltzmann calculations to explain that the whole radiative forcing greenhouse conjecture fails to explain reality”. I have to say the following:
“Thermal energy is being transferred by diffusion”. Heat is thermal energy. It can be transferred from one place to another by conduction, convection and radiation. Conduction and convection involve particles, radiation involves electromagnetic waves. Heat can only be transferred between “existent” molecules. Without them, like in out-space, there is not temperature or heat transference. Our atmosphere contains heat because it contains molecular compounds absorbing and transferring heat. The case of GHGs is that they are among the most thermal conductive molecular compounds found in the atmosphere. It is like cooking dry food. You need a substance to transfer the heat to cook aliments. Oil is good but water gets the heat inside the food cause its heat properties. There is no diffusion of heat in a vacuum of thermal flask. Thus it is important to identify the type and concentration of atmospheric gases.
“May be” the Stefan Boltzmann calculations can not be applied to explain the mean surface temperature of a body which is not homogeneous in composition in any of its parts, solid-liquid and gaseous, none-uniform on its surface albedo, thermodynamically active on its core and atmosphere, irregularly shaped, not flat neither a perfect sphere, in constant motion and with 50% of its surface solar radiated meanwhile the other 50% is not. All those contrasts in the horizontal and the vertical assessments are relevant. Maybe the stratification of heat could be explain by S-B for a uniform body like the Sun, and yet At 20,000-25,000 km away from the solar surface the corona has an average temperature of 1,000,000 to 2,000,000 million degrees Celsius. But the density is very low, about 1 billion times less dense than water.
When it is applied on this matter the idea of that “The surface is cooled by GHG’s in the atmosphere. It is the atmosphere itself that is warmed as infrared light, reflected from earth’s surface, travels back toward space. This reflected light is absorbed by GHG’s and the air is warmed. This is the heat trapping property of GHG’s”
I would say that such point is similar to what happens by role played by sweat in cooling the body by allowing water to evaporate off the skin. The problem from GHGs is that their presence above the earth’s surface reduce the difference in temperature between them and the surface. In that way the reduction in the difference reduces the capacity of the atmosphere to diffuse the heat received at the surface. That creates positive feedback loop which moves towards increasing the amount of heat being contained in both parts of the column.
… (see full assessment following the link to the publication)
|November 17, 2016||Arctic Amplification versus Arctic Absorption (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.)See it full following the link at the title.|
|December 17, 2016||Extract from the publication: Orbital Seasonality vs Kinetic Seasonality. A Change Triggered from Changing the Order of The Factors (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD)Being CO2 a molecular element enhancing atmospheric thermal conductance, and aerosols acting as droplet nuclei in cloud formation, their combined effect altogether with alterations in the water cycles and energy flows due to anthropogenic activity would increase the capacity for the atmosphere to absorb, contain and disperse water vapour. But more importantly, this water vapour would incorporate an increase of energy into the atmospheric pool which it would affect atmospheric developments such as the strength, paths and life periods of lows and highs as much as those events concentrating energetic discharges in form of precipitation, wind and heat or cold waves.The outcome from such assessment foresees an spreading of energy through the atmosphere in Latitude and Altitude, driving a climatic drift which will affect life cycles in animals and plants as well as in soil degradation and water availability.
The assessments presented through the series of publications shared in the line of research published in this blog apply a point of view which considers an order of factors driven by thermodynamical principles. As the process followed in the order of the steps taken to cook the recipe to make an environment.
All these assessments foresee a change in the progression of Seasonality from Orbital Driven to Kinetic driven, considering kinetic an expression of the energy being driving the seasonal climatic regimes around the latitudes and longitudes.
… (see full assessment following the link to the publication)
Due to the lack of funding supporting my activity analysing atmospheric developments I can not be involved full time. Anyone interested in having my take on current dynamics feel free to leave a message here or at the blog. If you or your institution are interested in investing to further develop the project already published at the blog and researchgate you can contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org