UAH 5.3 has been updated. Now I can compare the March 2010 temperature anomaly to all previous march temperature anomalies:
- The March anomaly of 0.653C is the highest March anomaly in this data set.
- The March anomaly was exceeded by April and May 1998 anomalies of 0.753 and 0.770C respectively.
Paul K2 was interested in other recent records. I can confirm that the following recent months broker records for hottest UAH values in the v5.3 data set: Jan 2010, Nov 2009, Sept 2009.
Some people are watching to see how this year stacks up to past years. We can’t yet know the 2010 temperature anomaly, but we can look at the 12 month lagging temperature anomalies. I computed these and show them along with the march anomalies below:
Note that while this is the hottest March anomaly in the UAH v5.3 records, it has the 2nd highest 12 month lagging average ending in March. This year has the highest Jan-March average of 0.635C; this exceeds the 1998 Jan-March average of 0.621C. El Nino hasn’t died yet; expect to see continued warmth in the troposphere. We are on track to seeing the hottest year in the UAH record but we must wait and see what actually happens.
I wouldn’t expect to see continued warmth in the troposphere, Last month there was a discussion about how this El Nino is the second strongest on record where there was not a cooling influence by volcanic activity in the satellite record (using ONI).
You also know that there is a short lag between ENSO events and temperature changes. As you pointed out, March 1998, during the super El Nino, was unusually cool. This year’s El Nino (Nino 3.4) peaked in late December then began to cool for about a month, the cooling stalled while a kelvin wave worked its way East across the Nino regions, and is cooling again.
Also, Bob Tisdale wrote a post for Anthony showing why this March was warm; spikes in a few areas of the ocean. One of those spikes, the Central Atlantic off Africa, was very warm. This warmth was caused by a reduction in Sahara storms which lead to less aerosol (dust particle) cooling. Since water condenses around these dust particles, the overall effect was additional SST warming caused by reduced cloudiness over the Eastern / Central Atlantic. Once again, this was only one of the affected areas around the globe.
So there was a lot of normal and natural warming, except that this year, the spikes lined up more than in past years.
Bob’s Post:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/04/05/march-global-sea-surface-temperatures/#more-18218
MikeC–
Do you expect April’s temp to drop relative to March? I’m not so sure. I don’t know if we’ll break the April 98 temperature, but I don’t expect the troposphere to plunge. Wouldn’t an April anomaly of 0.6C still constitute “continued warmth”?
If we get a slow decline in temps, we’ll break the 1998 annual record even if the monthly values never hits the april value. If the temps plunge rapidly without first rising to peak monthly values, we won’t.
Lucia, thank you. The plot is helpful. I also am interested in the 12 month moving average, although the UAH team actually reports a 13 month moving average.
My guess is that if the 13-month moving average breaks above 1998, it will happen sometime in the three months after the July reading. To break it with the July report, it would take about 0.62 average readings for April, May, June, and July. Possible, but not highly likely, although the “baked-in” adjustments from the recent UAH modifications should significantly add to May and June reported anomalies.
Paul–
I set my spread sheet up to easily make N month moving averages. The 12 month moving average isn’t much different fro the 13 month moving average.
So you just want to know when the 13 month moving average breaks the maximum ever? Or when it breaks the Dec 97- Dec. 98 average? I’m showing all april-march averages. So, I’m not comparing to the maximum for all time.
Paul–
Also, the 13 month lagging average ending this month is the 2nd highest of those ending in March. Given the content of your comment over at Joe’s and the interjection, it may turn out that Christy was referring to this when answers “second highest” to whatever it was Joe actually asked him. (Or not.)
Lucia, If we were limiting temperature to those areas which are most affected by ENSO then I would say no. Obviously, global temperatures are not ONLY affected by ENSO.
The arctic is a little warmer now, even though it is back on a downward trend.
The situation with the Central Atlantic may change this month, but I doubt the upward spike in temperatures there will resolve itself that quickly.
There is a warm spike in the ocean around Antarctica, I’m not sure what the cause of that one is. But since there are warm anomalies north of Antarctica, between Australia and South America, that warm water can ride the surface right up the coast of South America, disrupt MSLP, then kick us right back into El Nino within the next 8 months (it’s happened before) which would cause global temps to stay up, rather than go down like in 98 when there was a bounce right into La Nina.
The Indian ocean is behaving as expected, but then you get into that whole Dipole thing (kinda like PDO, not really well understood, at least by me)
But my guess is that we’ll continue a slow slide back into La Nada and that the annual average will be close to 98 due to the slow exit from El Nino conditions as opposed to 98 where El Nino exited fast. Given how the ocean and atmosphere have been working together lately, I’d bet the slow slide back to La Nada will probably more be in steps rather than slide.
Two observations.
We have had the warmest start to a year for some time yet the sea ice cover has increased to near normal levels.
The last time we had a lengthy ‘quiet’ sun (1911-13) it was followed by a very hot 1914-15. We have now had a ‘quiet’ sun for the past 2 years – will we see a repeat in 2010-11?
Now that 5.3 is out, I’m updating the differences between RSS and UAH and some of them are very large. The last seven months of UAH NoPol and UAH NoExt for the lower troposphere are rapidly diverging. For land only, the divergence starts in 2005 for globe and tropics and is almost a step change, but I don’t see a similar divergence for land plus ocean. Weird.
I have a question about the effect of El Nino on global temperature. The current El Nino has lasted longer than the 1997-1998 episode (about one year, versus 8 months) but peak intensity was much lower. Does one expect less effect on temperature, or more, or about the same? In other words is ENSO intensity the major factor, or duration, or “area under the curve”?
Wilt,the current El Nino has not so far lasted as long as the 97-98 event. It will have to pass the threshold until May-June July to equal 97-98’s length.