Are the world’s wet regions becoming wetter and dry regions becoming drier?

Surprising evidence from the oceans suggests they are responding to warming at a faster rate than we previously thought. These changes are expressed by patterns of freshening and enhanced salinity in the ocean surface layer. How does an ocean get fresher or saltier? If there is more rain than evaporation…

Cqkgmbs7-1340002973
What does it matter how much rain falls on the ocean? For understanding climate, it matters quite a lot. Ines Hegedus-Garcia

Surprising evidence from the oceans suggests they are responding to warming at a faster rate than we previously thought. These changes are expressed by patterns of freshening and enhanced salinity in the ocean surface layer.

How does an ocean get fresher or saltier? If there is more rain than evaporation in an area, it’ll get fresher (less saline); less rain and more evaporation leads to a saltier ocean. These estimates of long-term ocean surface salinity suggest that the global water cycle (which is comprised of all rainfall and evaporation fluxes) has intensified over the 1950-2000 period by 4% – around twice the rate that global climate models have suggested.

These might not sound like large numbers, but it turns out that, over time, they represent significant changes to the predominant rainfall patterns in any given area. A difference of a few percentage points in the intensity of the regional water cycle can mean the difference between being classified as one climatological zone or another.

The spatial patterns of change are telling. Fresh ocean regions are getting fresher (wet regions are getting wetter), and salty ocean regions are getting saltier (dry regions in the subtropics, the same climatological zone of southern Australia, are becoming drier). These new observations agree well with our understanding of how the climate system will respond to a warming Earth. Over land, we measure change with rainfall gauges. Over 71% of the globe (which is ocean), it’s a little more difficult. This is where long-term salinity measurements become useful.

Why consider the ocean?

So why should we care about changes to the global oceans anyway? It’s not as if we live there, are dependent on rainfall to grow crops there (some island nations excluded) or really care how salty or fresh parts of the ocean are. Well the answer to that question is pretty simple.

The oceans are the flywheel of climate, with the top “skin” of the global ocean – down to a little over 3m – able to store the same amount of heat as the entire atmosphere. The depth of the ocean actively involved in climate is far deeper than this. As a consequence, what happens in the ocean, and the way that the ocean changes over time, matters to climate. Indeed the heat that the ocean “stores” and then “releases” at a later stage will markedly influence the weather that we experience day-to-day, and the climate that we experience decade-to-decade and over even longer timescales.

The ocean covers 71% of the Earth’s surface and holds 97% of the Earth’s free water (it’s where the water is..). It has absorbed 90% of the excess heat over the last 50 or so years in response to warming and is currently soaking up 50% of our anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions.

Global water cycle schematic – the oceans are where the water is. Paul Durack

Multiple assessments of long-term ocean temperatures have independently come to the conclusion that the oceans, both at the surface and subsurface, have been constantly warming throughout the period of observational coverage. As these numerous studies have checked and re-checked the numbers, inconsistencies have uncovered biases with the data. But once these biases have been corrected (using many different techniques, generated from many independent groups), yep, it’s still been warming at an even more steady and faster pace than the previous estimates suggested.

Salinity is a less-sampled ocean variable. There are fewer observational data points, as historically salinity has only been measured by oceanographic research cruises. Since around 2000 however, it has also been measured by the new fleet of automated Argo profiling floats.

These robots are cool! They’re carried around by currents in the global ocean and profile from the near-surface to 2000m depth over a 10-day cycle. They measure temperature and salinity over this cycle, and when they reach the surface, they upload this data to satellites, which then relay on to data centres around the globe. Thanks to these research-quality observing platforms, we’re confident of salinity measurements and are unaware of platform biases to date.

Salinity is linked to the global water cycle by the surface ocean fluxes of evaporation and rainfall. Australians are very water-aware; the recent Australian flooding and our memories of long-term droughts are a testament to that. The development and success of global communities is intimately related to water availability, with water scarcity limiting growth and development. So how can we use long-term salinity measurements, and estimates of its long-term change to assess changes to the global water cycle over the same time period?

Importantly, ocean salinity provides an independent line of evidence we can use to test our understanding of long-term climate and its change. The ocean salinity field responds to changes in both evaporation and rainfall at the ocean surface, not one or the other independently. So it is a good indicator of long-term, whole system water cycle change. Ocean salinity is a fairly stable, reliable way to measure how much water goes up and comes down; and provides a low-pass filter to the noisy spatial and temporal patterns of rainfall.

So what do these new long-term estimates of salinity change tell us? The global water cycle and consequently our climate is changing. The pattern of “fresh-getting-fresher, salty-getting-saltier” is quite striking, is replicated in independent analyses, and is also captured in the subsurface patterns of salinity change. This pattern of change is even there when we sample each global ocean basin – the Pacific, the Atlantic or the Indian Ocean – independently. Changing ocean salinity is really trying to tell us something.

Ocean annual mean surface salinity 1950-2008 (red is salty, blue is fresh) and 2B. Ocean surface salinity change 1950-2000 (red is getting saltier, blue is getting fresher). There is a clear match between salty regions in A (red) that are getting saltier B (red) and fresh regions in A (blue) getting fresher B (blue). Paul Durack

Modelled change

So how does changing salinity link back to rainfall and evaporation? The best tools scientists currently have to investigate relationships between observed changes in rainfall, evaporation and ocean salinity are coupled global climate models. These systems simulate both the atmosphere and the ocean over time.

The good news: when we investigated the response of global climate models to enhanced carbon dioxide forcing, we discovered that the models were capturing the processes of change, responding in the same way, with the same modelled broad-scale patterns of salinity intensification as the observational estimates. They are performing well at replicating our observed Earth system.

The bad news: the rates of change of the modelled salinity fields are around half that of the observed estimates for 1950-2000 – a cause for concern.

So the rate of change suggested by the models was worrying enough. If ocean salinity (and the Earth’s water cycle) is changing faster, and is more sensitive than we simulate in models, it isn’t really good news for projections of future 21st century climate.

Which data source is right?

Whenever our observed world and climate models disagree, the tendency among non-experts is to blame the models. Surely there is something missing in the physics that represents the modelled climate system?

However among scientists, the approach is more cautious. Sometimes the models tell us that there is a problem with the observations. Could an error in the analysis of the observational data mean that we are systematically overestimating the observed water cycle changes?

Patterns of salinity change agree with independent satellite estimates of both rainfall and evaporation changes over tropical regions since 1980. These studies also say that the rates of change captured by models are conservative, when compared to observations. Even if we exclude the great new ocean observational coverage of the Argo robotic fleet of profiling floats, those patterns of salty getting saltier and fresh getting fresher are still there. However, the patterns are even more clear in the updated analyses.

If we take the new estimate of water cycle amplification – 4% over 1950 to 2000 where we have experienced a 0.5°C Earth surface warming – it is possible that a big change of around 20% could occur in response to a 2° to 3°C warmer world.

That could mean really big changes in rainfall and drought by the end of the 21st century. Scientists hope that this is not the case, but it shows that uncertainty is a double-edged sword when it comes to climate change, and not the refuge from risk that some would want us to believe.

Sign in to Favourite

Want to follow The Conversation?

Sign up to our free newsletter to get the day's top stories in your inbox each morning, with a special wrap on Saturday.

Spinner
Become a friend of The Conversation and donate

Join the conversation

16 Comments sorted by

  1. Mark Duffett

    logged in via Twitter

    That last figure is really instructive. The apparent freshening south and particularly southwest of Australia is certainly consistent with the drying of southwest WA in recent decades, with rain that previously fell there now falling in the Southern Ocean as weather systems shift poleward.

    report
  2. Gil Hardwick

    Anthropologist

    Yes, I agree, an enormous relief to have some coherent data and discussion here finally, though I'm not sure the scientists are listening yet.

    Adding to Mark's comment on "the drying of southwest WA", the specific area affected is the Lower Southwest where it cannot be said to be drying it is merely less wet. The Lower Southwest remains in our high rainfall belt, its driest period over the past 110 years being from 1975 to 1984. The driest year was 1911, with the next around 2000 and third around…

    Read more
    1. Tim Scanlon

      Author and Scientist

      In reply to Gil Hardwick

      Actually Gill, that's 1914. Major drought and a war, great year in WA history.

      report
    2. trevor prowse

      retired farmer

      In reply to Tim Scanlon

      Has anybody seen the cumulative deviation from mean rainfall graph produced by the dept of Water--Hydrogeological Record Series HG14----Gnangara Groundwater mound-Declining Water Levels. It illustrates that between 1880 and 1920 (Perth wet and dry periods) that those 40 years experienced a similar dry period to the last 40 years. An article by Gao.J and Lui, Y. 2012 --De (re)forestation and climate warming in subartic China.Applied Geography 32:281-290-----Suggest that climate warming ( just as in WA) could be caused by loss of vegetation. Worth considering other reasons other than CO2 INCREASE

      report
    3. Tim Scanlon

      Author and Scientist

      In reply to trevor prowse

      Not similar, but it did have a dry period.

      When you take into account climate cycles it becomes very clear that what we are experiencing now is completely different from what happened in 18880-1920. BOM has this data easily viewable. I recommend the 11 year moving average to take into account sun activity cycles to show the long term trend for SW WA, but anything over 5 years shows the same thing.

      report
    4. David Arthur

      n/a

      In reply to trevor prowse

      In the case of SW WA, vegetation changes have certainly played a role in altering rainfall amounts. This may be considered a local phenomenon, (although similar such 'local' phenomena have occurred world wide; the Romans deforested the area around Masada to build siege towers over 18 centuries ago, and it remains barren to this day).

      That said, the shifting of climate belts is a globally observed phenomena.

      report
    5. David Arthur

      n/a

      In reply to Gil Hardwick

      A bit simple, Gil. The Perth landscape has evolved over millenia under a Mediterranean climate (hot dry summers, mild wet winters). Sure, oodles of summer downpours might refill dams, swimming pools and water tanks, but it does little for SW WA's unique biome.

      It occurs to me that anthropology that neglects the context, the environment, of its human subjects is blind in at least one eye.

      report
    6. Gil Hardwick

      Anthropologist

      In reply to David Arthur

      I don't know who you are, David Arthur, and I am certain you don't know me or my work over 25 years, or indeed read any of my papers which are very much concerned with human impacts on the environment - in the case of the Lower South West as far back as 1791.

      I have no idea what it is you are talking about concerning "SW WA's unique biome." Whatever it is, there has been nothing unique about it for over 120 years when the forests were cut down and exported to Europe and South Africa, or 150 to…

      Read more
    7. Gil Hardwick

      Anthropologist

      In reply to Tim Scanlon

      1911, Tim, recorded 643 mm, while 1914 recorded 834 mm. And yes, it was a drought period, broken in 1921 by 1643 mm.

      If this is the extent of criticism from colleagues, I rest my case . . . :-)

      report
    8. David Arthur

      n/a

      In reply to Gil Hardwick

      Thanks Gil. Err ... you know there's no such thing as a winter monsoon? SW WA's winter rain is due to seasonal shifting of rain-bearing fronts from the subpolar low pressure belts.

      While the SW WA biome has been substantially disturbed since European arrival, it still includes many unique species. One may well throw up ones' arms in despair at the ongoing perturbation wrought by the feral intruders .. if one is sufficiently blinded by a need for purity; that seems to be your position.

      In which case, why bother contributing to pages such as this, any way?

      report
  3. Geoff Russell

    Computer Programmer, Author

    Many thanks Paul for a very clear explanation of a complex set of findings.

    report
  4. Peter Lang

    Retired geologist and engineer

    "Back in 2009, the failed Copenhagen “climate summit” was with retrospect a founding event for the climate change industry: in many ways it never recovered from this massive hit from what are called "climate sceptics". Since that time, the small but powerful group of OECD country political leaders, corporate elites, and mainstream press and media barons who promoted the image of climate catastrophe with the straightest of faces, seemingly believing every word of the doom-eager rantings of James Lovelock, James Hansen, Al Gore and others, have backed off and edged away from their failing and shrinking monster."

    Read the article here:
    http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article35357.html

    report
  5. Craig King

    logged in via Facebook

    The volume of water in the world's oceans is 1.3 Billion Cubic Kilometers.

    The volume of water in the atmosphere is 12900 Cubic Kilometers.

    The water in the atmosphere came, largely, from the ocean and it will, largely return there. If evaporation increased by 4% that would be an additional 516 Cubic Kilometers. This would increase the salinity of the ocean by 0.0000397%. I would be very surprised if there was any salinity measuring device that could read a change so small.

    This article sounds like another bubble of nonsense by those wishing us to be suitably concerned about AGW. In other words it is bollocks.

    report
    1. Mike Hansen

      Mr

      In reply to Craig King

      Good one Captain Bollocks. I would suggest not giving up your day job.

      As the article states in the second sentence "These changes are expressed by patterns of freshening and enhanced salinity in the ocean surface layer"

      Your calculation is meaningless nonsense.

      report
  6. Gil Hardwick

    Anthropologist

    Thinking a lot more about this over the past week, I take the view that the really very serious problem looming with the oceans is not warming as such, but greater equilibrium between polar and equatorial bodies of ocean.

    And going back over the comments, it strikes me again how emotive some of the lurkers and trolls can be in the fact of hard facts. Again, the very point of academic papers is not to prove a point, or to win some popularity contest, but to attract criticism and review.

    The more red marks the more effective the critique.

    report