Graph 1 suggests that, during the 2002-03 El Niño event, the water temperature at 50 and at 100 meters below sea surface remained similar from July 18 to September 29 of 2002; however, the water temperature at 100 meters below the surface was slightly colder. After that date range, the water temperature at 100 meters below the surface decreased by ≈5 °C while the temperature at 50 meters below the surface remained constant throughout the entire length of time. The water temperature at 200 meters below the surface remained colder than at 50 and 100 meters below sea level and continued to decrease at a gentle slope from July 18 to December 5, by ≈5 °C. A temperature increase of ≈2 °C was observed from December 5 to January 16.
As indicated by Graph 2, the water temperatures at 50 and 100 meters below sea level differed by ≈4±1 °C from each other, and decreased at similar slopes. The temperature at 100 meters below sea level remained colder than that at a 50-meter deepth. The water temperature at 200 meters below sea level remained ≈10±2 °C lower than that of the other two depth temperatures. From August 1 to August 15, the temperatures at 50, 100, and 200-meter depths remained mostly constant with no more than ≈1°C variations. A second consistency between the three depths was that all three graphs have positive slopes, from September 12 to September 26, which became negative from September 26 to October 10. In this time range, the
…show more content…
The water temperature at 200 meters below sea level ranged between 18 and 20 °C throughout the entire time range. The water temperatures at the three depths had an approximately constant temperature from October 24 to November
The water was taken from the same source and the same thermometer was used, yet different values were derived each time. This is a type of environmental factor, which is a random error as it affected the values differently.
Questions to answer in your lab report. NOTE: some questions pertain to the week 1 exercise, some to week 2, and others to both. How is the amount of temperature variation related to the volume of the water body? How might you measure the speed of temperature change? How would you expect the speed of change to vary with habitat volume? Are water temperatures different than air temperatures? How are they different? Are there any cyclical patterns in the temperature-logged data (“time series”) from Angel? If so, what do you think caused these repeating patterns? Based on the results of this exercise, how might you
A. Water boils at 100°C at sea level. If the water in this experiment did not boil at 100°C, what
Temperature was a constant 16.2 °C in both microhabitats. Dissolved oxygen content was higher in the pool at 9.67 mg/L, compared to the 8.64 mg/L in the riffle (Table 1).
The average temperature was approximately 9.67 C. The temperature of the water is significantly impacted by the amount of cool wind the area receives, the amount of sunlight, and the time of year in which the temperature was measured. These factors allow for the water to maintain significantly cooler throughout the year. Also affected by wind are the velocity and rate of flow of the stream. The average velocity is 0.29 meters per second (m/s) and the rate of flow is 41.30 meters3 per second (m3/s). The velocity and rate of flow in the area are higher because it was closer to the dam and also contained areas that were more elevated than some. Sunlight, on the other hand, also affected the turbidity and the photic zone. The turbidity of the stream was 26.50 centimeters (0.265 meters), while the photic zone was 0.42 meters. The photic zone is the depth of the water that receives the greatest amount of sunlight that is then used to carry out photosynthesis. Turbidity is an indicator of how much algae or sediments is present in a lake because it affects the visibility of the water. The cloudiness of the water is caused by the dissolved particles scattering light molecules within the water. The average depth of the water is 9.50 meters and the average width of the water is 14.99 meters. The measurements of the width and depth are not affected by anything. According to Trout
The first argument examined on the man-made global warning side is that increasing greenhouse gases caused by human activities is causing directly observed climate changes. The first resulting climate change discussed is warming global surface temperature. There has been an increase in global surface temperature of 0.74 degrees C since the late 19th century. In the last 50 years alone the temperature has increased by 0.13 degrees C per decade. North America and Eurasia have seen the largest increase in warmth. However, some areas of the earth have actually cooled some this past century (Easterling & Karl, 2011, para6). After the mid 20th century 70% of the global land mass saw reduced diurnal temperatures. From 1979 to 2005 the maximum and minimum temperatures have shown no change; both indicate warming (Easterling & Karl, 2011, para10). Furthermore, borehole temperatures, snow cover, and glacier recession data all seem to agree with recent warming (Easterling & Karl, 2011, para11).
It has been observed through various researches that in the last century, average temperatures across the globe increased by over 1.3°F with an increase of more than two times in the Arctic. (Bates, Kundzewicz, Wu, & Palutikof, June 2008). The results of climate change can also be seen in changing precipitation patterns, increases in ocean temperatures, changes in the sea level, and acidity and melting of glaciers and sea ice (USEPA, 2014).
The graph visually represents the various temperature anomaly changes between 1880 and 2005. Temperature anomaly, quite simply, is the deviation from the average temperature for the region over a period of time. It can be either positive or negative, and this data undeniably supports the fact that climate change is very real. In the late nineteenth century, the majority of the temperature anomalies were negative. Unfortunately, Earth has not seen a negative temperature anomaly since 1982. At the end of the twentieth century and the beginning of the twenty first, the anomalies were overwhelmingly positive. Visually, the data points create a shape that curves upwards as it progresses. This visual is strengthened by the addition of a regression
Extreme climate change is crucial to understand and prominently discovering resolutions is essential to better our environment. This is calculated by the reading of satellites and several other forms of measurements. The two different remarks made from the 19th century and the 1950s era, concluded the various prolonged transformations on the ocean, air and terrestrial surface. It has been proven over the years the warming of the surface has occurred, nonetheless the whole earth had experienced this warming. The last thirty years has been the warmest time era in comparison to the last fourteen hundred years. It has been noticed not only the warming of the surface of the land but also the decline of snow, upsurge of sea altitudes and gas concentration.
Monsoon season has led to changes in temperature worldwide. As an example, the seasonal temperature anomalies from June–July–August (Northern Hemisphere summer, Southern Hemisphere winter). The surface temperature anomalies relative to the base period from 1951 to 1980 are shown in Figure 1 for mid-decade years of the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, and for the past six years. Most regions in recent years are warmer than during 1951 to 1980. However, some areas are cooler than the 1051 to 1980 mean occur every year. For example, the United States was unusually cool in the summer of 2009. Research shows that global warming since 1951 to 1980 is about 0.5-0.6⁰C (about 1⁰F). Even though this seems small compared to weather fluctuations. This level of
2.) Is the sea and ocean temperatures increasing in the past 20 years in the area of Puerto Rico?
These waters of the North Atlantic Deep Water (NADW) sinks and flows southward along the continental slope of North and South America toward Antarctica and flows eastward around the Antarctic mixing with Antarctic waters. The water circulation then flows northward at dept into the three ocean basins. During this northward flow, they slowly begin to warm and mix with overlying waters and as a result, rise toward the surface at a rate of about 1 centimeter per day over most of the
Figure 3: Time series showing seasonal and annual average of global upper ocean heat content for the 0-700m layer since 1955 (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration)
El Nino is a phenomena that occurs when the ocean and the atmosphere collide. The warm atmosphere mixes with the water and creates a moisture in the air creating a low pressure system. A high pressure system is created when the cold water reduces the air above it. During a low pressure system the air becomes moist and can create severe tropical storms, on the other hand when there is a high pressure system the cold dry air goes back down and takes away all of the moisture. When combined this can create a high and low pressure forcing the wind in the atmosphere to blow low and the higher air blows higher, causing the ocean to react. The ocean is home to many things including an invisible boundary called the thermocline which divides the warm mixed water on top and the cold calm water on the bottom. When there is a shallow thermocline this creates a small trace of warm water, and a deep thermocline hints there 's a large amount of warm water. Because warm water takes up more space than cold water, the sea level is higher when the thermocline is deep and lower when the thermocline is shallow. We are now aware of a phenomenon similar to El Niño called La Niña, in which conditions are opposite to those of El Niño. El Nino is a phenomena in which warm atmosphere mixes with the water and creates a moisture in the air creating a low pressure system. The ocean is home to many things including an invisible boundary called the thermocline which divides the warm mixed water on top and
entrainment of temperature anomalies at the bottom of the winter mixed layer to the simple null hypothesis of Frankignoul and Hasselmann (1977). The proposed implicit-entraining