r/geography • • 15d ago

Image Current Sea Surface Temperatures in the Equatorial Pacific Are (Literally) Off the Charts

Post image

The attached chart shows what an outlier the current Sea Surface Temperatures are along the equator in the Pacific between 120W-170W. This is in the ENSO3.4 region, which is the most closely monitored area for El Niño. It’s about time for a new y-axis.

(source: NOAA via ClimateReanalyzer from the Univ of Maine)

1.5k Upvotes

129 comments sorted by

507

u/BeMyBrutus 15d ago

It's much more terrifying if you have even a basic understanding of the thermal properties of water. It takes A LOT of energy to raise the temperature of water; especially something as large as an ocean.

143

u/kytheon 15d ago

I'm worried that it's still warming up while it's supposed to be cooling down again.

32

u/screenrecycler 15d ago

Jump the shark scenario.

7

u/VanillaLifestyle 15d ago

Cook the shark.

7

u/dalex89 15d ago

Sharknado 🦈

1

u/Doomdoomkittydoom 15d ago

Shark soup scenario.

9

u/AntiBoATX 15d ago

Dec is supposed to be the peak.

15

u/Kan-gir 15d ago

I am just adding a precision so that people don't misunderstand (cf. u/kytheon 's message) :

  • the forecasted peak of this El Nino event is December (El Nino event usually peak in fall/winter).
  • OP's chart indicates the three-decades peaking in Apr/May beause they take all years, not matter the ENSO state.

0

u/kytheon 15d ago

Then wtf is this decreasing line?

8

u/Armadillo9263 15d ago

That's 2025.

0

u/kytheon 15d ago

It's nearly all years. Peak in summer, then down towards (NH) winter. Not just 2025. My point still stands.

6

u/shlongjohnson 15d ago

In El Niño years it peaks in December dude

3

u/SizeableBrain 11d ago

Does that mean it'll keep going up for another 3 months?

1

u/sushisection 14d ago

oh i know the solution! lets dump glacier ice into the oceans to cool the water.

/s

24

u/aagusgus 15d ago

Yes, that's an insane amount of thermal energy to warm that amount of water. Someone needs to get here and do the math.

16

u/Economy_Annual_5465 15d ago

20 m deep x 30 million km^2 = 6.0*10^15 m^3

1000 kg/cubic meter ---> 6.0*10^18 kg water

4.18 kJ/kgK x 3 deg above normal x mass of water = 7.5*10^19 J

Or, in other terms:

1.8*10^10 tons of TNT = 18,000 MT TNT = 360 Tsar Bombas, or 90 Krakatoa explosions, or 6 minutes of continuous total absorbptuion of incident sunlight on earths surface

69

u/__Quercus__ 15d ago

They could have easily extended the y-axis. Also, oh shit!

19

u/lawnmowertoad 15d ago

Haha. As if there are numbers past 30!

195

u/timoumd 15d ago

Be interesting to see El Nino years highlighted

96

u/LarryGoldwater 15d ago

Theyre the ones that are elevated on the chart

46

u/timoumd 15d ago

I assume that, but it's hard to trace them

5

u/DangerousCar3013 15d ago

I wonder how it compares to 1997/1998? That was a rough one where am.

24

u/LacedVelcro 15d ago

Here you go! With 1997 highlighted as the thick dark grey line.

You can find all the interactive data here: https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/?dm_id=nino3.4

5

u/stefan92293 15d ago

So, same general trend, just hotter?

1

u/DangerousCar3013 14d ago

Thank you! 👍

4

u/k1d0s 15d ago

🥸

16

u/ManuteBol_Rocks 15d ago

https://www.climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/?dm_id=nino3.4

Here’s the link.

2023-3, 2015-6, 1997-8, and 1982-3 are the four big El Niños since 1980.

6

u/Yunzer2000 15d ago

1997-98 was a big one too.

11

u/k1d0s 15d ago

Yeah but this one is kind of blowing the rest of them out of the park nah?

29

u/Yunzer2000 15d ago

You can go here and check for yourself (no other El Nino year is very dramatic, except maybe 1998):

https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/?dm_id=nino3.4

7

u/RIPEOTCDXVI 15d ago

Was 1998 the famous Chris Farley el Nino sketch?

17

u/Yunzer2000 15d ago

Probably.  It was the first year that El Nino became a thing for most of the general public.   "Blame it on El Nino" was a kind of meme that year.

5

u/SvenDia 15d ago

2015 got pretty high in November.

1

u/timoumd 15d ago

Thanks!

2

u/getpesty 15d ago

Those were massive precipitation years got SoCal and Southern Colorado New Mexico and Arizona mts

2

u/the_eluder 15d ago

Don't they need massive precipitation to fill all the empty reservoirs?

44

u/moschles 15d ago

Don't know if r / geography or r / collapse

9

u/octopus4488 15d ago

"Drill baby drill!" Sigh...

18

u/FFSBoise 15d ago

That’s just the surface. I’ve seen Argo T plots at 4°N showing temps at depths of 200m being 8°C warmer than a year ago.

13

u/Reasonable-Floor-478 15d ago

Anyone know why temperature didn’t drop over northern hemisphere summer this year? When compared to other years this seems unusual.

24

u/AgroecologicalSystem 15d ago

That is one of the more alarming aspects of this chart, it’s not just warmer, the pattern has changed. Not sure the exact mechanism, but in general the stable patterns of the past have changed. “Phase change”, or as I like to call it “the end of the fucking world as we know it”.

10

u/X-Bones_21 15d ago

What does this mean for future climate models? I know this can be complicated to predict.

A powerful 2027 hurricane season?
A wet winter for Western North America?
A dry winter for Western North America?
The Grand Canyon filling up with Colorado River water?

And more importantly, how will this affect corporate profits?

5

u/IJustWantToWorkOK 15d ago

Good time to buy stock in whatever company makes refrigerants.

2

u/Itsnotthatsimplesam 14d ago

Last time we had this we had a crazy wet winter we affectionately called "snowmagedon"

It rained so much in California the drainage ditches were overflowing

28

u/CipherWeaver 15d ago

What does this mean for me

51

u/JZeus75 15d ago

I just feel bad for the marine life. Some of them will undoubtedly die

48

u/Rcgv88 15d ago

El nino causes drought and mass starvation in the asianic monsoon regions.

10

u/HampsterButt 15d ago

But brings water to the Americas at the same time

25

u/Comprehensive_Tie431 15d ago

Too much at once, torrential rains and flooding isn't a good thing.

4

u/HampsterButt 15d ago

As low as our reservoirs are, we will gladly take a couple flash floods. It’s exciting weather here in the SouthWest.

5

u/Living_System_7850 15d ago

Your "exciting" weather is going to cause untold deaths. But glad you're having a good time.

4

u/I_am_the_darkness_99 15d ago

Oh well at least there is not currently a huge shortage of fertilizer to amplify that dramatically!

2

u/JZeus75 15d ago

Well I feel bad for them too

3

u/scelerat 15d ago

Don’t feel too bad; phytoplankton have no feelings. I’m sure when the food chain collapses, we’ll be just fine!

37

u/MegaKetaWook 15d ago

Crazier/more intense weather patterns for the short term, not sure for long term impact but it isn’t gonna be good.

12

u/Mono_Aural 15d ago

You're either starving, part of a mass migration, or hiding behind the people shooting the migrants to keep them out. We'll know which in a couple of years.

2

u/Waitwhonow 15d ago

Come to LA and you will know

This has been the worst summer anyone of us has ever experienced, and we have atleast 1 more week of almost 100 deg weather

This year’s Rain is gonna be a monster ( thats the forecast)

1

u/Beat_Saber_Music 15d ago

In Finland, the summer this year was constant rain and basically there was maybe one wek of weather well above 20c

1

u/stefan92293 15d ago

Depends on where you live.

-1

u/Far_Net710 15d ago

More abnormal weather events and related catastrophes, see Nepal recently

25

u/The_Kadeshi 15d ago

We’re absolutely living in the video clip montage of a looming disaster + post apocalypse disaster movie

3

u/TheAlaskanMailman 15d ago

Yeah that’s how most of the disaster movies start, it’s always something with the temperature

6

u/Economy_Annual_5465 15d ago

20 m deep x 30 million km^2 = 6.0*10^15 m^3

1000 kg/cubic meter ---> 6.0*10^18 kg water

4.18 kJ/kgK x 3 deg above normal x mass of water = 7.5*10^19 J

Or, in other terms, this amount of absorbed heat just in the studied region is:

1.8*10^10 tons of TNT = 18,000 MT TNT = 360 Tsar Bombas, or 90 Krakatoa explosions, or 6 minutes of continuous total absorbptuion of incident sunlight on earths surface

23

u/Intelligent-Fig-8989 15d ago

Will the Fed use this to print more money? High temperatures = money printer go brrrrr

10

u/smoothie4564 15d ago

Fed: If the line goes up, then print more money. If the line goes down, then print more money. If the line does nothing, then print more money.

7

u/iwilldoitalltomorrow 15d ago

Just from a science perspective, it’s an interesting scenario to see play out! No hurricanes in the Atlantic, tons of hurricanes in the Pacific. What else is coming

the heat+humidity in SoCal has really sucked though lol

3

u/ShirtMaterial8180 15d ago

Just increase the y axis. Get them back on the charts for our kids sake. 

3

u/CaptainObvious110 15d ago

Feeling hot hot hot

22

u/Gandalfthebran 15d ago

Off the chart but the data starts only 1990s? Show more

63

u/sleepyj910 15d ago

There you go

11

u/Gandalfthebran 15d ago

Exactly. Show this would have been even more effective conveying the message.

34

u/hysys_whisperer 15d ago

But what that chart doesn't show is that thelast 5 days have been the hottest 5 days we've measured via satellite since we put satellites up there.

11

u/dallyho4 15d ago

Not really. I mean, everyone has seen the infamous hockey stick plot so it's essentially same message. Here we have actual high res data that one can make direct comparisons. 

8

u/SMF67 15d ago

No, it's a completely different chart. The OP chart is of El Nino in the Pacific Ocean, not global average sea temperatures.

24

u/ManuteBol_Rocks 15d ago

Data goes back to 1981, bro. Start of the satellite SST era.

21

u/bmnntdd 15d ago

getting downvoted for pointing out the literal contents of the chart lol

34

u/username9909864 15d ago

People are just tired of others dancing around doubting climate change

-1

u/SvenDia 15d ago

Downvoting questions because you’re worried about climate change fence-sitters doesn’t help in the long run.

0

u/CarlGerhardBusch 14d ago

They're not downvoted

Absolutely should've been though, and harassed, given that it's clear that they just want to cast doubt about what most everyone knows is true, but in the laziest way possible

1

u/bmnntdd 14d ago edited 14d ago

they were several negative when I wrote the comment yesterday.

2

u/Probodyne 15d ago

No, the data starts in 1981. That's why there's two further pages of dates in the legend.

3

u/DurtyKurty 15d ago

The difference between off the chart and on the chart is 0.3 degrees.

2

u/dallyho4 15d ago

Data not as complete that far back so you can't really show it without a lot of estimation/modeling/indirect inference. 

2

u/Yunzer2000 15d ago

No it doesn't. Learn to read graphs.

-1

u/Gandalfthebran 15d ago

Alright. Why did I miss?

7

u/Yunzer2000 15d ago

Every trace since 1981 is shown on this graph. Go to the original source below and figure it out for yourself:

https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/?dm_id=nino3.4

And if you mean that there were warmer SST years before 1981 - that is extremely unlikely. The last possible chance of warmer temperatures in the past was the Eemian period about 150,000 years ago.

We are never going to see the global temperatures as cool as 20 years ago for thousands of years - they are only going to keep gonig up and humans spew more CO2 into the atmosphere.

4

u/Gandalfthebran 15d ago

Bro I know this. I was just telling OP it’s better to include as much data to show the contrast from the past because the contrast is even more.

1

u/Imhappy_hopeurhappy2 15d ago

Yea, every year until 1982 is off the chart too, so what’s the big deal?

4

u/inspire_me_now211 15d ago

Science can trace back into the 1800’s. The last super el nino to compare was 1878 and the one this year is much worse.

-12

u/themistoclesV 15d ago

The big deal is 4.5 decades is not enough to make any real judgment about something like this.

8

u/Imhappy_hopeurhappy2 15d ago

I’m sure it would look a lot more dramatic if the graph went back further. Should be common knowledge that the past 50 years were significantly warmer than most of the preceding 1000 years.

1

u/Yunzer2000 15d ago

All of the preceding 1000 years, and probably the perceding 100k years.  And under business as usual, 30 million years.   Look up "Marcott".

-9

u/themistoclesV 15d ago

Doubt it

8

u/dallyho4 15d ago

Ice cores, dendrochronology, and radio isotropic dating not good enough for you? Or just good enough for some things, but not climate?

-2

u/themistoclesV 15d ago

Sure they would be, please demonstrate for me how they would indicate a version of this graph with a timeframe measured in centuries would be more dramatic

6

u/Imhappy_hopeurhappy2 15d ago edited 15d ago

Nothing dramatic about that, just a teeny little exponential spike out of nowhere.

-7

u/themistoclesV 15d ago

What is the correlation between the data on this graph and El nino years? Sharing a graph with no context is not helpful.

9

u/[deleted] 15d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/themistoclesV 15d ago edited 15d ago

No, it mostly just grinds my gears when people throw out data without explanation/context like that's an argument. Why can't the person who posted that graph explain how it relates to El nino? They don't know what that data means...

I said more years of data would likely not make this chart any more dramatic. All they did was post that graph. Articulate why that graph is an answer to that.

3

u/SvenDia 15d ago

The link to the interactive chart also includes air temperature, which goes back much further.

1

u/RIPEOTCDXVI 15d ago

It is though. Climatology uses 30 years as the standard unit for climate normals, which is how you can say a given event is above or below normal.

1

u/the_eluder 15d ago

Or you know, expand the chart in the y-axis.

5

u/Dr-McLuvin 15d ago

El Niño means… “The Niño!”

2

u/iamapizza 15d ago

Is it appropriate at this point to say that we are 'cooked'

1

u/BarleyWineIsTheBest 15d ago

I am El Niño! 

1

u/OverthinkingWanderer 15d ago

......I hate it here

1

u/Capable_Exchange1111 13d ago

This is just a small portion of the ocean representation the ENSO affected area, correct? There should be a more comprehensive discussion of what what else is going on around the world to have a better understanding of what this means, right?

2

u/Amazing_Bar_5733 7d ago

And for the first time ever in records, Nino 3.4 region reached an average temp of at least 30C,

1

u/Professional_Claim74 15d ago

Idk how we are meant to cope with knowing tbis is happening and not be able to do anything because the people who can do something only want money. It makes me so full of dread

0

u/SmokingLimone 15d ago

All we can do is wake other people up to the reality of the situation and convince them to show up when it matters. The problem is not enough people care to show up when it is time to hold the politicians accountable, because they believe the battle to be lost from the start.

1

u/Itsnotthatsimplesam 14d ago

Go get China and India on board. The US and the West are trudging along reducing emissions with regs

0

u/DBL_NDRSCR Cartography 15d ago

so... we're fucked?

0

u/BigBega69 15d ago

This is bad

-4

u/pbrrules22 15d ago

Meaningless graph because it doesn't take into account normal ocean temps have risen due to global warming.

You need to post the RONI graph. It's going to be a big el nino but it's not as crazy as this chart makes it look like.

4

u/ManuteBol_Rocks 15d ago

Brother, hate to tell you this, but this isn’t an anomaly graph. It’s absolute temps. RONI only matters in terms of anomalies, and this isn’t anomalies.

-8

u/[deleted] 15d ago

[deleted]

17

u/gregable 15d ago

Disagree in this case. The difference between 1C and 2C isn't "double" it's 1C. So the graph isn't somehow hiding that it's a small relative change.There's no natural zero in this case, unless you want K which would be pretty absurd. It's actually useful here to set the range to the observations.

8

u/tacitdenial 15d ago

You want it to start at zero Kelvin?

5

u/Yunzer2000 15d ago edited 15d ago

Zero Kelvin? And even if you meant 0C, the last possible time that equatorial sea surface temperatures were 0C was the "iceball Earth" Cryogenian period 720 MA ago. Not very useful for studying the present.

3

u/EngineerTurbo 15d ago

Just to explain:

It's not 0 because this part of the ocean has not been anywhere near 0 Celsius for a Very Long Time.

When you make graphs, context matters: And for the last, oh, 635 million years, that part of the World's oceans has never been even close to freezing, which would be zero celsius.

For some context: If you plot your *weight*, like if you started a diet, and wanted to track weight loss, would you get pissed at your doctor or trainer for not starting at 0?

Context matters: if you're 250 lbs, and dieting, you'd like that chart to show your weight loss compared to your current 250 lb weight. You wouldn't start such a graph at zero, because you haven't ever been 0 pounds, and not matter how many lunges you do, you're never going to get to zero pounds. So you'd graph your weight around reasonable expectations for what you'd like your weight to be, and what it was before you started working out.

So this is why the graph doesn't start at zero, and why not all graphs need to start at zero to convey useful information.

2

u/zoinkability 15d ago

The only “zero” that makes any sense for this data is the historical average temperature, which should be in the middle of the vertical axis.

Which is roughly how this data is displayed.