The atmosphere is a plexiglass enclosure. The land is something that will absorb some warmth but hold it for only a short time. The Sun is cycled on and off to see both day and night activity. During the day, the water captures joules and releases some of them. It increases humidity levels. Joules movement is from Land to Water during the day as the Water lags the Land. During night the joules move from Water to Land warming it. At night the sources of joules are the Water warmed during the day plus any warmth remaining from the prior day plus a small contribution from the cooling Land. The Land is a minor source for Water warming. Water being better able to absorb and store joules is the major source for the system.
Now add CO2.
The Land joules have their old path, into the Water. The land can punch more into the Water as less is lost to the TOA. The Water will lose less to the Atmosphere during sunny days. The water has now warmed because of the CO2. Its SW absorption is the same. At first it emits less because of the CO2, but then it has more to emit which does it, while having greater storage. The water has more joules than before and will emit those to the Land for a longer time each night. CO2 has lowered TOA loss until the new warmer equilibrium is reached. Each night the Water tries to reach equilbrium with the Land which has little storage so it’s a waypoint on the way to the TOA. It is the Water warming the Land more than before with the help of CO2.
“…while wind and solar PV continued their fast growth (+11% and +35% respectively), and accounted for around 1% of global energy production.”
“Assuming the proposed cuts are extended through 2100 but not deepened further, they result in about 0.2°C less warming by the end of the century compared with our 2014 estimates.”
Lomborg took some heat for his study that found about the same thing.
“Projections of Antarctic SMB changes over the 21st century thus indicate a negative contribution to sea level because of the projected widespread increase in snowfall associated with warming air temperatures (Krinner et al., 2007; Uotila et al., 2007; Bracegirdle et al., 2008). Several studies (Krinner et al., 2007; Uotila et al., 2007; Bengtsson et al., 2011) have shown that the precipitation increase is directly linked to atmospheric warming via the increased moisture holding capacity of warmer air, and is therefore larger for scenarios of greater warming. The relationship is exponential, resulting in an increase of SMB as a function of Antarctic SAT change evaluated in various recent studies with high-resolution (~60 km) models as 3.7% °C–1 (Bengtsson et al., 2011), 4.8% °C–1 (Ligtenberg et al., 2013) and ~7% °C–1 (Krinner et al., 2007). These agree well with the sensitivity of 5.1 ± 1.5% °C–1 (one standard deviation) of CMIP3 AOGCMs (Gregory and Huybrechts, 2006).” – AR5
Zwally did a study that said AR5 was right, but of course, he is the outlier. And he’s wrong. He found global warming and of course it’s not true because I’ll say, Antarctica is gaining ice sheet mass on land.
Jones and Ricketts:
“We propose that there is negligible in situ atmospheric warming and that almost all of the added heat trapped by anthropogenic greenhouse gases is absorbed by and stored in the ocean. It Jones and James H. Ricketts is subsequently released through the action of oscillatory mechanisms associated with regime shifts. Most heat (long-wave radiation) is trapped near the ground or ocean surface and much of that is radiated downwards (Trenberth, 2011). The atmosphere as a whole has little intrinsic heat memory and does not warm independently of the surface.
This is supported by observations on land where the overpassing air mass takes on the characteristics of the underlying surface, achieving energy balance within a 300 m distance (Morton, 1983). When passing from land to water, this will see all of the available heat energy taken up by water if the temperature of the air mass exceeds that of water (Morton, 1983, 1986), with the temperature of the overpassing air mass reaching equilibrium with the water beneath within a very short time. Very little of the heat trapped over land can be absorbed by the land surface, but will be transported from land to ocean within a few days to a few weeks, where it can be absorbed (the high latitudes being an exception).”
New ‘Karl-buster’ paper confirms ‘the pause’, and climate models failure
My lake near Lake Minnetonka of about 140 acres in size and with 8 feet of average depth went ice out on March 7th. Wind speeds were at least 30 mph for a sustained time. My lake is now ice in. I do not recall this happening in the past 2 decades. I typically see 2 regime changes per year. Looks like will have double that amount for 2017. I’d say the high winds forced a regime swap removing lake insulation. The lake wanted its ice back and got it.
I’ve also seen another rare occurrence. Typically the creek/ditch outletting to Lake Minnetonka stops doing that before and during Winter. The creek is dry. It will flow all Winter this year as it did a year ago. Back to back occurrences means what? There has not been unusually high levels of precipitation. Call our recent Winters milder. Cold decreases water flow. With global warming, farmland may drain more in Winter. The farmers can get into the fields earlier. They may need less tile. There may be less Spring Flooding in Fargo. Perhaps it’s the case that a sped up hydrological cycle is better.