On the energetics of stratified turbulent mixing, irreversible thermodynamics, Boussinesq models and the ocean heat engine controversy

In this paper, the available potential energy (APE) framework of Winters et al. (J. Fluid Mech., vol. 289, 1995, p. 115) is extended to the fully compressible Navier– Stokes equations, with the aims of clarifying (i) the nature of the energy conversions taking place in turbulent thermally stratified fluids; and (ii) the role of surface buoyancy fluxes in the Munk & Wunsch (Deep-Sea Res., vol. 45, 1998, p. 1977) constraint on the mechanical energy sources of stirring required to maintain diapycnal mixing in the oceans. The new framework reveals that the observed turbulent rate of increase in the background gravitational potential energy GPEr , commonly thought to occur at the expense of the diffusively dissipated APE, actually occurs at the expense of internal energy, as in the laminar case. The APE dissipated by molecular diffusion, on the other hand, is found to be converted into internal energy (IE), similar to the viscously dissipated kinetic energy KE. Turbulent stirring, therefore, does not introduce a new APE/GPEr mechanical-to-mechanical energy conversion, but simply enhances the existing IE/GPEr conversion rate, in addition to enhancing the viscous dissipation and the entropy production rates. This, in turn, implies that molecular diffusion contributes to the dissipation of the available mechanical energy ME =APE +KE, along with viscous dissipation. This result has important implications for the interpretation of the concepts of mixing efficiency γmixing and flux Richardson number Rf , for which new physically based definitions are proposed and contrasted with previous definitions. The new framework allows for a more rigorous and general re-derivation from the first principles of Munk & Wunsch (1998, hereafter MW98)’s constraint, also valid for a non-Boussinesq ocean: G(KE) ≈ 1 − ξ Rf ξ Rf Wr, forcing = 1 + (1 − ξ )γmixing ξ γmixing Wr, forcing , where G(KE) is the work rate done by the mechanical forcing, Wr, forcing is the rate of loss of GPEr due to high-latitude cooling and ξ is a nonlinearity parameter such that ξ =1 for a linear equation of state (as considered by MW98), but ξ <1 otherwise. The most important result is that G(APE), the work rate done by the surface buoyancy fluxes, must be numerically as large as Wr, forcing and, therefore, as important as the mechanical forcing in stirring and driving the oceans. As a consequence, the overall mixing efficiency of the oceans is likely to be larger than the value γmixing =0.2 presently used, thereby possibly eliminating the apparent shortfall in mechanical stirring energy that results from using γmixing =0.2 in the above formula.

Knowledge sharing: Context, confusion and controversy

Project managers in the construction industry increasingly seek to learn from other industrial sectors. Knowledge sharing between different contexts is thus viewed as an essential source of competitive advantage. It is important therefore for project managers from all sectors to address and develop appropriate methods of knowledge sharing. However, too often it is assumed that knowledge freely exists and can be captured and shared between contexts. Such assumptions belie complexities and problems awaiting the unsuspecting knowledge-sharing protagonist. Knowledge per se is a problematic esoteric concept that does not lend itself easily to codification. Specifically tacit knowledge possessed by individuals, presents particular methodological issues for those considering harnessing its utility in return for competitive advantage. The notion that knowledge is also embedded in specific social contexts compounds this complexity. It is argued that knowledge is highly individualistic and concomitant with the various surrounding contexts within which it is shaped and enacted. Indeed, these contexts are also shaped as a consequence of knowledge adding further complexity to the problem domain. Current methods of knowledge capture, transfer and, sharing fall short of addressing these problematic issues. Research is presented that addresses these problems and proposes an alternative method of knowledge sharing. Drawing on data and observations collected from its application, the findings clearly demonstrate the crucial role of re-contextualisation, social interaction and dialectic debate in understanding knowledge sharing.

Tropospheric temperature trends: history of an ongoing controversy

Changes in atmospheric temperature have a particular importance in climate research because climate models consistently predict a distinctive vertical profile of trends. With increasing greenhouse gas concentrations, the surface and troposphere are consistently projected to warm, with an enhancement of that warming in the tropical upper troposphere. Hence, attempts to detect this distinct ‘fingerprint’ have been a focus for observational studies. The topic acquired heightened importance following the 1990 publication of an analysis of satellite data which challenged the reality of the projected tropospheric warming. This review documents the evolution over the last four decades of understanding of tropospheric temperature trends and their likely causes. Particular focus is given to the difficulty of producing homogenized datasets, with which to derive trends, from both radiosonde and satellite observing systems, because of the many systematic changes over time. The value of multiple independent analyses is demonstrated. Paralleling developments in observational datasets, increased computer power and improved understanding of climate forcing mechanisms have led to refined estimates of temperature trends from a wide range of climate models and a better understanding of internal variability. It is concluded that there is no reasonable evidence of a fundamental disagreement between tropospheric temperature trends from models and observations when uncertainties in both are treated comprehensively

Mutamenti politico-istituzionali nella Venezia Giulia e a Trieste tra Tito e gli americani alla luce delle nuove testimonianze documentarie da Washington, 1944-1954

“La questione di Trieste”, ovvero la questione del confine italo-yugoslavo all’indomani della seconda guerra mondiale costituisce da lungo tempo oggetto di attenzione e di esame da parte della storiografia italiana e straniera. Con alcune importanti eccezioni, la ricostruzione complessiva di quelle vicende ha visto il più delle volte il prevalere di un approccio storico-diplomatico che ha reso difficile comprendere con chiarezza i rapporti e le interdipendenze fra contesto locale, contesto nazionale e contesto internazionale. Attraverso la lettura incrociata dell’ampia documentazione proveniente dai fondi dei National Archives Records Administration (NARA) questo studio tenta una rilettura delle varie fasi di sviluppo della questione nel periodo compreso tra il giugno del 1945 e l’ottobre del 1954 secondo una duplice prospettiva: nella prima parte si concentra sulla politica americana a Trieste, guardando nello specifico a due aspetti interni tra loro strettamente correlati, la gestione dell’ordine pubblico e la “strategia” del consenso da realizzarsi mediante il controllo dell’informazione da un lato e la promozione di una politica culturale dall’altro. Sono aspetti entrambi riconducibili al modello del direct rule, che conferiva al governo militare alleato (GMA) piena ed esclusiva autorità di governo sulla zona A della Venezia Giulia, e che ci appaiono centrali anche per cogliere l’interazione fra istituzioni e soggetti sociali. Nella seconda parte, invece, il modificarsi della fonte d’archivio indica un cambiamento di priorità nella politica estera americana relativa a Trieste: a margine dei negoziati internazionali, i documenti del fondo Clare Boothe Luce nelle carte dell’Ambasciata mostrano soprattutto come la questione di Trieste venne proiettata verso l’esterno, verso l’Italia in particolare, e sfruttata – principalmente dall’ambasciatrice – nell’ottica bipolare della guerra fredda per rinforzare il sostegno interno alla politica atlantica. Il saggio, dunque, si sviluppa lungo due linee: dentro e fuori Trieste, dentro 1945-1952, fuori 1953-1954, perché dalle fonti consultate sono queste ad emergere come aree di priorità nei due periodi. Abstract - English The “Trieste question”, or the question regarding the Italian - Yugoslav border after the Second World War, has been the object of careful examination in both Italian and foreign historiography for a long time. With a few important exceptions, the overall reconstruction of these events has been based for the most part on historic and diplomatic approaches, which have sometimes made it rather difficult to understand clearly the relationships and interdependences at play between local, national and international contexts. Through a comparative analysis of a large body of documents from the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), College Park MD, this essay attempts a second reading of the various phases in which the question developed between June 1945 and October 1954, following a twofold perspective: the first part focuses on American policy for Trieste, specifically looking at two internal and closely linked aspects, on the one hand, the management of ‘law and order’, as well as a ‘strategy’ of consent, to be achieved through the control of all the means of information , and, on the other, the promotion of a cultural policy. Both aspects can be traced back to the ‘direct rule’ model, which gave the Allied Military Government (AMG) full and exclusive governing authority over Venezia Giulia’s Zone A. These issues are also fundamental to a better understanding of the relationships between institutions and social subjects. In the second part of the essay , the change in archival sources clearly indicates a new set of priorities in American foreign policy regarding Trieste: outside any international negotiations for the settlement of the question, the Clare Boothe Luce papers held in the Embassy’s archives, show how the Trieste question was focused on external concerns, Italy in particular, and exploited – above all by the ambassador – within the bi-polar optic of the Cold War, in order to strengthen internal support for Atlantic policies. The essay therefore follows two main lines of inquiry: within and outside Trieste, within in 1945-1952, and outside 1953-1954, since, from the archival sources used, these emerge as priority areas in the two periods.