What do the numbers mean? These are the increases in the median temperatures Celsius from the 1955-1975 era to the 1999-2010 era in these six slices of the Antarctica out to 60° South Latitude. That gives as all the Antarctic Peninsula and adds no part of any other continent.
Why the question marks? Using the methodology below of only using grid points with at least 90% of the seasons between 1955 and 2010 reporting, the slice south of Africa and the slice directly opposite had no readings at all.
Why those years? All four of those years are strong La Niña years.
What's the methodology? Splitting each slice into a 10 × 10 grid and looking for grid points that reported temperatures in at least 90% of the seasons between 1955 and 2010.
Are these numbers big or small? They are all over the place. The rise of 1.92° C and 2.77° C in the two regions surrounding the Antarctic Peninsula are very large indeed, as is the -1.17° C drop in the region south of the Indian Ocean. There isn't another region in the ones we chose that had a drop that steep.
What's the cause? In the two slices with big increase, the change is albedo, areas where ice on the sea surface melts and exposes more water. Losing oceanic ice does NOT increase sea level, but it does mean more heat is absorbed. This is a feedback loop.
As for the region getting cooler, this may be due to more sea ice than before.
What's the main problem? Melting ice caps in the land mass around the Antarctic Peninsula.
What do humans have to do with this? Once again, greenhouse gases.
For answers to more questions, check out the Arctic recap.
Tomorrow, the temperate zone of the Northern Hemisphere, by far the most populous zone and the most land mass, so it is split into twelve slices instead of just six.
No comments:
Post a Comment