Marine temperature extremes are anomalous ocean temperature events, often persisting over several weeks or longer, with potential impacts on physical and ecological processes that often encompass socio-economic implications. In recent years, a considerable effort has been directed at the development of metrics allowing an objective characterization of both marine heatwaves (MHWs) and marine cold spells (MCSs). However, the majority of these metrics do not consider explicitly the spatial extent of the events. Here, we rank and evaluate the relative importance of marine temperature extreme events thanks to a metric, called activity, that combines the number of events, duration, intensity and spatial extent. According to this definition, in the Mediterranean basin between 1982 and 2021, summer 2018 experienced slightly more MHW activity than summer 2003, documented as an exceptional extreme event. Besides, MHW activities were higher in the last two decades while winter MCS activities were higher in the 1980s-1990s. The highest MHW activities occurred preferentially in the western Mediterranean while the strongest MCS activities took place preferentially in the eastern Mediterranean. Moreover, the duration, mean intensity, and activity of the three strongest MHWs are twice as high as those of the three strongest MCSs. The long-term tendency of extreme events activity shows an accelerated increase for summer MHWs (about +150°C.days.10⁶km²) and a linear decrease for winter MCSs in the Mediterranean (about -60°C.days.10⁶km²) over the last four decades.
The impact of Arctic sea-ice loss on the ocean and atmosphere is investigated focusing on a gradual reduction of Arctic sea-ice by 20% on annual mean, occurring within 30 years, starting from present-day conditions. Two ice-constraining methods are explored to melt Arctic sea-ice in a coupled climate model, while keeping present-day conditions for external forcing. The first method uses a reduction of sea-ice albedo, which modifies the incoming surface shortwave radiation. The second method uses a reduction of thermal conductivity, which changes the heat conduction flux inside ice. Reduced thermal conductivity inhibits oceanic cooling in winter and sea-ice basal growth, reducing seasonality of sea-ice thickness. For similar Arctic sea-ice area loss, decreasing the albedo induces larger Arctic warming than reducing the conductivity, especially in spring. Both ice-constraining methods produce similar climate impacts, but with smaller anomalies when reducing the conductivity. In the Arctic, the sea-ice loss leads to an increase of the North Atlantic water inflow in the Barents Sea and Eastern Arctic, while the salinity decreases and the gyre intensifies in the Beaufort Sea. In the North Atlantic, the subtropical gyre shifts southward and the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation weakens. A dipole of sea-level pressure anomalies sets up in winter over Northern Siberia and the North Atlantic, which resembles the negative phase of the North Atlantic Oscillation. In the tropics, the Atlantic Intertropical Convergence Zone shifts southward as the South Atlantic Ocean warms. In addition, Walker circulation reorganizes and the Southeastern Pacific Ocean cools.
The direct response of the cold-season atmospheric circulation to the Arctic sea ice loss is estimated from observed sea ice concentration (SIC) and an atmospheric reanalysis, assuming that the atmospheric response to the long-term sea ice loss is the same as that to interannual pan-Arctic SIC fluctuations with identical spatial patterns. No large-scale relationship with previous interannual SIC fluctuations is found in October and November, but a negative North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO)/Arctic Oscillation follows the pan-Arctic SIC fluctuations from December to March. The signal is field significant in the stratosphere in December, and in the troposphere and tropopause thereafter. However, multiple regressions indicate that the stratospheric December signal is largely due to concomitant Siberian snow-cover anomalies. On the other hand, the tropospheric January–March NAO signals can be unambiguously attributed to SIC variability, with an Iceland high approaching 45 m at 500 hPa, a 2°C surface air warming in northeastern Canada, and a modulation of blocking activity in the North Atlantic sector. In March, a 1°C northern Europe cooling is also attributed to SIC. An SIC impact on the warm Arctic–cold Eurasia pattern is only found in February in relation to January SIC. Extrapolating the most robust results suggests that, in the absence of other forcings, the SIC loss between 1979 and 2016 would have induced a 2°–3°C decade−1 winter warming in northeastern North America and a 40–60 m decade−1 increase in the height of the Iceland high, if linearity and perpetual winter conditions could be assumed.
We investigate the impact of Arctic sea ice loss on the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (AMOC) and North Atlantic climate in a coupled general circulation model (IPSL‐CM5A2) perturbation experiment, wherein Arctic sea ice is reduced until reaching an equilibrium of an ice‐free summer. After several decades we observe AMOC weakening caused by reduced dense water formation in the Iceland basin due to the warming of surface waters, and later compensated by intensification of dense water formation in the Western Subpolar North Atlantic. Consequently, AMOC slightly weakens in deep, dense waters but recovers through shallower, less dense waters overturning. In parallel, wind‐driven intensification and southeastward expansion of the subpolar gyre cause a depth‐extended cold anomaly ∼2°C around 50°N that resembles the North Atlantic “warming hole.” We conclude that compensating dense water formations drive AMOC changes following sea ice retreat and that a warming hole can develop independently of the AMOC modulation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.