Revisiting global hydrological cycle: Is it intensifying? – Demetris Koutsoyiannis
Abstract.
As a result of technological advances in monitoring atmosphere, hydrosphere, cryosphere and biosphere, as well as in data management and processing, several data bases have become freely available. These can be exploited in revisiting the global hydrological cycle with the aim, on the one hand, to better quantify it and, on the other hand, to test the established climatological hypotheses, according to which the hydrological cycle should be intensifying because of global warming. By processing the information from gridded ground observations, satellite data and reanalyses, it turns out that the established hypotheses are not confirmed. Instead of monotonic trends, there appear fluctuations from intensification to deintensification and vice versa, with deintensification prevailing in the 21st century. The water balance on land and sea appears to be lower than the standard figures of literature, but with greater variability on climatic time scales, which is in accordance with Hurst-Kolmogorov stochastic dynamics. The most obvious anthropogenic signal in the hydrological cycle appears to be the overexploitation of groundwater, which has a visible effect on sea level rise. Melting of glaciers has an equal effect, but in this case it in not known which part is anthropogenic, as studies on polar regions attribute mass loss mostly to ice dynamics.
Over-exploitation of aquifers can increase sea level? And I thought the sky was falling.
….such a scam
sea level is so sensitive pumping ground water has “a visible effect”
and the same people tell us that trillions of cubic yards of sediments…daily….washing into the ocean doesn’t
Not sure I buy the aquifer/sea level argument…..
In AB we have monitored our aquifer for decades. It is declining and has been for a long time. Aquifers naturally ebb and flow based on the drought cycle.
The land based ice balance near the poles make much more difference. And the error bars on those are so large as to make this exercise meaningless.
The Aquifer in South Jersey, when over-used becomes OPEN to Salt water intrusion… The Salt water is moving up (north) the Aquifer from the Chesapeake …Additional River Inputs help prevent over-use
SEA LEVELS are independent of a common floor….They raise and lower per Gravity (Moon Tides).. It is silly not to know that the Continental Shelf exists….and why…..
JMHO
no sense of scale . the aquifers are SFA
Quick, lets all head for the hills. I know this sounds silly because it will be millions years but someday this planet will be a cold dead dry rock. Maybe we should start worrying about it immediately.
And after that the sun will expand and swallow the earth. The earth must keep all of its petroleum so it will properly light up at that time.
It’s fascinating to me that Revelations appears to include a description of widespread drought and radiation poisoning, ending in the rounding up of 144,000 humans to populate the zoos of the universe (as it would be explained by a stone-age witness who sat through a simulation that was understandable to the stone-ager, but couldn’t be described very well by the language of the time). And the Lord just happened to be captain of one of the rescue vessels.
ALL glaciers “melt”, all the time.
If the ice in contact with the underlying rock did not melt (due to pressure), the glacier could not move; it would be frozen to the rock.
Most of the melt-water seen flowing from a glacial face is flowing from the BOTTOM of the glacier. That funny gurgling sound you hear when standing next to a moulin is the melt-water running through channels deep inside the glacier.
Glaciers ONLY move because of the enormous pressure applied “uphill”. This is normally applied via constant cycles of snowfall in the Neve, the big ice and snow patch at the very top. No snowfalls, now added pressure and ice-mass. The glacier movement slows, but the melting from pressure continues.
Why would there be little or no snowfall? Reduced evaporation. Why does evaporation occur? Three guesses, second two don’t count.
So, if the planet COOLS, there is less evaporation, globally. Air movement patterns change drastically. No evaporation, NO precipitation.
Ice Ages are very dry, very nasty times. The ice that DOES move is the stuff that freezes out of the oceans and, as seen recently on the Great Lakes, starts to “creep” ashore. Because ice FLOATS and is thus susceptible to winds and waves. Never forget that those “Great Lakes” are themselves, a product of serious continental “glaciation”; ditto most of the thousands of lakes in Canada and some spectacular “rock-carving” the the US Pacific North-West.
If ice did NOT float, the planet would have become a big, dirty snowball at the onset of the FIRST Ice Age, or earlier. NOTHING would survive that.
Sounds like a wash. Over-under intensification? Also known as “the weather”…
How many billions we pay these clowns?
All the scientific data collected is subjected to interpretation. After that all interpretation is subject to interpretation.
“Que sera, sera”…. Doris Day.