TerraPass blog

Desert dust helps lower ocean temps

Tim Varga | July 27, 2009

But as climate change kicks in, seas could end up in nasty feedback loop

 

Sea levels continue to rise, and not just because of melting ice caps, but also because warmer global temperatures cause thermal expansion. The rise in temperature would be even greater if not for dust and aerosols in the atmosphere that deflect some of the sun’s heat. Scientists don’t have a great understanding of exactly how important this dust effect is. A new paper suggests that it’s actually very important — and that’s bad news.

A host of reasons have been offered for the roughly 0.25 °C per decade temperature increase in the North Atlantic. Global warming is one culprit. A broken deep sea “conveyer belt” — that giant convective loop that drives cold, nutrient rich water up certain coasts and warmer water toward the deep basins — is another. Scientists also suspected that dust blown off the Saharan desert and volcanic aerosols push temperatures downwards, but the relative strength of these effects was unknown.

A team of climate scientists at the University of Wisconsin and at NOAA, by feeding satellite data into a model of ocean-atmosphere energy exchange, have found that all those dust and aerosol particles are responsible for up to 67% of the variability in ocean temperatures. In other words, if not for the cooling effect of these particles, ocean temperatures would be much warmer than they are now.

Airborne, these small particles deflect sunlight away from the earth’s surface, and can cause between -0.1 and -2.0 °C of cooling in the Atlantic Ocean. Most of this cooling can be attributed to the stratospheric class of aerosols — the stuff spewed into the upper atmosphere from the likes of Mt. Etna and Mt. Pinatubo. The dust and sand kicked up from the desert also has a measurable effect.

This is where the problem arises. Some have predicted a 40-60% decrease in the amount of dust after a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere (pdf), creating a positive feedback loop: more warming means less dust, which means more warming.

To give some scale, up to 1.6 million metric tons of dust (the tropospheric class of aerosols) are swept off the Saharan desert every year — enough to fill up to 58 million dump trucks. To geoengineer our way out of this positive feedback loop, we’d have to dump tens of millions of trucks-worth of dust into the atmosphere every year. And even if we did this, all that dust would do nothing to counteract the acidification of the ocean from elevated CO2. Humans may be able to adapt our way into surviving climate change, but ocean-dwelling creatures may not be so lucky.

Image by Wikimedia commons.

< Previous: Climate change skeptics: put your money where your mouth is    Next: Reading the tea leaves on the climate bill >

Comments


  • 1.

    Global warming has basically taught me how much everything in nature is interconnected. As a child growing up in rural Maine, I NEVER in my worst nightmare imagined how many problems the world would struggle with, such as animal, plant and insect species becoming extinct, threatened and/or endangered. It is heart-breaking when I read that a certain species - animal, for example - has less than 100 "members" left. That reality really hits me hard compared to statistics that say the numbers of a certain snimal (for example) species has dwindled by a certain percentage.
    It becomes unimaginable because most people only see a lot of animal species in zoos, so it means very little to us. Most people have either birds, cat, dogs, reptiles, fish, horses, burros or chickens, depending on their lifestyle -- the more common animals, rather than any of the animals seen in zoos.

    So now I have a reason to be glad for dust.
    This gives me a different perspective, as I'm sure it does for most people.

    Thank you,

    Cheryl Erb


    Reply
  • 2.

    Why would an increase in CO2, even doubling it, tend to decrease the amount of dust in the atmosphere? If warming and precipitation changes cause an expansion of dry areas, then the dust will probably increase. Or is it a matter of decreased wind over dry areas?


    Reply
  • 3.

    Regarding a hypothetical decrease in atmospheric dust caused by a doubling of CO2:

    The second linked article (pdf) does NOT mention CO2 doubling at all. The title of the article is "Sensitivity study of meteorological parameters on mineral aerosol mobilization, transport, and distribution". It is a sensitivity study of aerosol (dust) transport, nothing CO2 or climate change-related.

    Please provide a suitable study to back your claim. Without credible sources this kind of discourse can be labeled "fear-mongering" by the skeptics.


    Reply
  • 4.

    "Airborne, these small particles deflect sunlight away from the earth’s surface, and can cause between -0.1 and -2.0 °C of cooling in the Atlantic Ocean."

    Pedantic old me suggests the negative signs in the above sentence are redundant as you have specified the temperature change as cooling. You could in fact be suggesting that they cause a rise in temperature. :)


    Reply

The comments section is now closed.


AddThis Feed Button
CATEGORIES

Conservation tips
News
Politics
Science & Technology
Society
TerraPass Answers