Arctic Ice Discussion (the Refreeze 2012-2013)

[Gray-Wolf]

BFTV has just linked a good NSIDC overview which links you onto other resources explaining how the systems work.

I do think that north and south are 'linked' as they exist on the same planet but do not ,in any way, feel that there is some kind of 'balancing act' going on there. For a start , as the NSIDC info shows, not only are they 'poles apart' but the scale of changes between each one are 'poles apart'?

I do not think that there is much doubt (within the discipline) that mankind's influence has provoked an Antarctic response that is actively 'pushing ice away' from the continent and so increasing extent/area. The report also points to the peninsula (outside the circumpolars) and the way warming is impacting there. Over time the changes there will push through the circumpolars and on to the land mass.

The impacts low ice in the Arctic are having on our N.Hemisphere circulation are another 'transient phase' as continued warming will allow Nature to find a more stable solution to the new energy levels entering the climate system.

[BornFromTheVoid]

This is an Arctic Ice question honest Is there really no connection, between below average Arctic ice? and the current above average Antarctic ice? It's just really strange that this should be the case is it not, that one is dramatically increasing, and one is dramatically falling? If our Arctic ice made a recovery would the antarctic ice go back to more normal levels?. is the change in patterns around the south pole affecting our side of the world?I know that is a very simplistic way of saying things but is there an outside chance they could be linked? And causing the conditions we have currently?

First off, I'd suggest reading the NSIDC link posted above your post!

Now the Antarctic sea ice grows to a much larger extent each winter than the Arctic, but also falls to a much lower extent each summer than the Arctic. Part of that is to do with the thickness of the ice. The Antarctic sea ice is very thin and can't withstand the melt season despite being around an ice covered continent, where as the Arctic Ocean used to be covered in ice many meters thick that could last through the summer, despite being surrounded by warm land masses.

Much of the increase in the Antarctic sea ice is down to increase circumpolar winds, caused by the warming and the ozone loss. These winds tend the push the ice away from the continent, increasing the extent during the winter despite the warming. But seeing a the ice is still thin, it still melts out almost entirely each summer, despite it's growth in winter. It's is thought that the warming will soon overcome the effects of the wind generated ice growth soon, but we really don't know when that will happen.

Now the Arctic experienced a similar increase in westerly winds associated with a trend of lower Arctic Oscillation values up to around 2000. This, combined with the warming (land masses are warming more than oceans) caused the thick ice to get pushed out of the Arctic (similar to Antarctica now) and into the north Atlantic, where it melted. Losing this thicker ice made the Arctic more vulnerable to summer melting. During the 2000s, the Arctic continued to warm and a new air pressure pattern became even more dominant, called the Arctic Dipole Anomaly. This is where high pressure would be common along the Canadian side of the Arctic, with low pressure along the Eurasian side. This caused winds that pushed the sea ice into the Atlantic even more, with 2007 having the strongest dipole anomaly pattern on record.

With the thick ice almost entirely gone, and the Arctic still warming, this allowed for the very large summer melts we've seen in recent years. The Arctic sea ice pattern is becoming more like Antarctica, whereby the maximum sea ice extent is still quite large, but the ice is too thin to last through the melt season.

Tis complicated thought, I know!

[quest4peace]

First off, I'd suggest reading the NSIDC link posted above your post!

Now the Antarctic sea ice grows to a much larger extent each winter than the Arctic, but also falls to a much lower extent each summer than the Arctic. Part of that is to do with the thickness of the ice. The Antarctic sea ice is very thin and can't withstand the melt season despite being around an ice covered continent, where as the Arctic Ocean used to be covered in ice many meters thick that could last through the summer, despite being surrounded by warm land masses.

Much of the increase in the Antarctic sea ice is down to increase circumpolar winds, caused by the warming and the ozone loss. These winds tend the push the ice away from the continent, increasing the extent during the winter despite the warming. But seeing a the ice is still thin, it still melts out almost entirely each summer, despite it's growth in winter. It's is thought that the warming will soon overcome the effects of the wind generated ice growth soon, but we really don't know when that will happen.

Now the Arctic experienced a similar increase in westerly winds associated with a trend of lower Arctic Oscillation values up to around 2000. This, combined with the warming (land masses are warming more than oceans) caused the thick ice to get pushed out of the Arctic (similar to Antarctica now) and into the north Atlantic, where it melted. Losing this thicker ice made the Arctic more vulnerable to summer melting. During the 2000s, the Arctic continued to warm and a new air pressure pattern became even more dominant, called the Arctic Dipole Anomaly. This is where high pressure would be common along the Canadian side of the Arctic, with low pressure along the Eurasian side. This caused winds that pushed the sea ice into the Atlantic even more, with 2007 having the strongest dipole anomaly pattern on record.

With the thick ice almost entirely gone, and the Arctic still warming, this allowed for the very large summer melts we've seen in recent years. The Arctic sea ice pattern is becoming more like Antarctica, whereby the maximum sea ice extent is still quite large, but the ice is too thin to last through the melt season.

Tis complicated thought, I know!

Slightly embarrased i missed your link BFTV will have a read through thanks I understand how people are misled by the higher and higher arctic extents now, for it to disappear so dramatically in summer mainly due to export and stupidly high ssts . Thanks for the above explanation, it is clear now that the ice in antarctica is a bit of an illusion, in that the common assumption can be that it must be healthier because of the massive extent down there.I see now, that is not the case and something rather more concerning is developing behind it

BFTV has just linked a good NSIDC overview which links you onto other resources explaining how the systems work.

I do think that north and south are 'linked' as they exist on the same planet but do not ,in any way, feel that there is some kind of 'balancing act' going on there. For a start , as the NSIDC info shows, not only are they 'poles apart' but the scale of changes between each one are 'poles apart'?

I do not think that there is much doubt (within the discipline) that mankind's influence has provoked an Antarctic response that is actively 'pushing ice away' from the continent and so increasing extent/area. The report also points to the peninsula (outside the circumpolars) and the way warming is impacting there. Over time the changes there will push through the circumpolars and on to the land mass.

The impacts low ice in the Arctic are having on our N.Hemisphere circulation are another 'transient phase' as continued warming will allow Nature to find a more stable solution to the new energy levels entering the climate system.

Thanks will have a read I'm probably asking questions many people before me have asked before, and is understandable to think there is a link Just proves how complex our planet is and how us "humans" need to stop seeing ourselves as gods and wrecking the place for our future generations :/

Edited October 3, 2012 by quest4peace

[Interitus]

The details of how much cooling we'd have if the gulf stream is something for another thread though, but it wouldn't be that much. Think the climate around Vancouver and other southern parts of the Canadian west coast and you'll get a better idea of what it might be like. We'll still have an ocean to our west with mainly westerly winds, so comparisons you see some people make with Labrador or Moscow if the gulf stream shuts down aren't realistic.

I don't think you mean Vancouver, south of the UK with similar temperatures already. Would need to look at cooler oceanic climates, northern BC, coastal Norway, Iceland etc. None would be an exact match because of latitude and varying continental influences but cool and damp most of the time.

In any case, it is not exactly clear that this would happen or would affect us. Recent research examining the Eemian warm period suggests that temperatures were warmer than today, enough to melt substantial parts of Greenland and it was thought to be the last time that the Arctic was ice free. However samples from the Nordic sea show the Arctic was still cold enough for ice and meltwater reduced the effect of the Atlantic drift in this region. But the North Atlantic was warmer and 'overheating' with continuing oceanic heat transfer from the south.

Press release summary - "Warm climate - cold arctic?"

http://www.geomar.de/en/service/kommunikation/singlepm/article/waermeres-klima-kaeltere-arktis/

Paper - "Contrasting ocean changes between the subpolar and polar North Atlantic during the past 135 ka"

http://www.leif.org/EOS/2012GL051800.pdf

[BornFromTheVoid]

I don't think you mean Vancouver, south of the UK with similar temperatures already. Would need to look at cooler oceanic climates, northern BC, coastal Norway, Iceland etc. None would be an exact match because of latitude and varying continental influences but cool and damp most of the time.

In any case, it is not exactly clear that this would happen or would affect us. Recent research examining the Eemian warm period suggests that temperatures were warmer than today, enough to melt substantial parts of Greenland and it was thought to be the last time that the Arctic was ice free. However samples from the Nordic sea show the Arctic was still cold enough for ice and meltwater reduced the effect of the Atlantic drift in this region. But the North Atlantic was warmer and 'overheating' with continuing oceanic heat transfer from the south.

Press release summary - "Warm climate - cold arctic?"

http://www.geomar.de...aeltere-arktis/

Paper - "Contrasting ocean changes between the subpolar and polar North Atlantic during the past 135 ka"

http://www.leif.org/...012GL051800.pdf

I gave Vancouver as a pointer to the general location!

I think the fact that Canadian west coast has a frigid winter continent to it's east takes away from it's similarity also. Still though, I'd say parts of Scotland could be comparable to the climate of Juneau in southern Alaska, though perhaps a tad milder.

Impossible really to find an exact match for the given scenario, especially being surrounded by water with the unusual shape of Europe.

Anywho, doesn't seem like the gulf stream shutting down seems like a realistic scenario anytime soon

[quest4peace]

The latest IJIS value : 4,166,563 km² (October 2, 2012) quite a small climb since i posted the last IJIS chart of only 20 odd thousand? seems a ridicoulously small gain ?

Edited October 3, 2012 by quest4peace

[cheeky_monkey]

I gave Vancouver as a pointer to the general location!

I think the fact that Canadian west coast has a frigid winter continent to it's east takes away from it's similarity also. Still though, I'd say parts of Scotland could be comparable to the climate of Juneau in southern Alaska, though perhaps a tad milder.

Impossible really to find an exact match for the given scenario, especially being surrounded by water with the unusual shape of Europe.

Anywho, doesn't seem like the gulf stream shutting down seems like a realistic scenario anytime soon

i think the problem in trying to compare the West coast of Canada and the UK is that the Rockies sit on the West coast and act as an effective barrier to the cold arctic air that spills south into N. America. Take that away and Vancouver would be much colder in the winter months.

[quest4peace]

Only a 6 or 7k rise over the day before?

The latest IJIS value : 4,173,594 km² (October 3, 2012)

[Gray-Wolf]

I'm not going to worry Q4P as I've been told that the Antarctic is doing some kind of 'balancing act' with the pole so all that energy flooding into the northern atmosphere will be somehow magicked away by the south polar sea ice?

We will not see any odd jet stream behaviour due to lessened temp/pressure grads this autumn/winter 'cause the south pole will be there waving it's magic 'balancing wand'. Nor will we see poor ice development across the pole leading to another year of very low summer ice because, this year we have the south pole looking after us. No early snow melt ,no albedo flip ,no record melts across Greenland and both northern sea routes (oh ,and the cross polar route the Chinese took) will be shut 'cause the south pole is now in the game making everything balance out............

[BornFromTheVoid]

Some more records today.

The NSIDC has actually had a small drop in extent yesterday of around 10k. This was enough though, to put us more than 3 million km2 below the 1979-2011 average and more than 3.5 million below the 1979-2000 average for the very first time.

[jethro]

I'm not going to worry Q4P as I've been told that the Antarctic is doing some kind of 'balancing act' with the pole so all that energy flooding into the northern atmosphere will be somehow magicked away by the south polar sea ice?

We will not see any odd jet stream behaviour due to lessened temp/pressure grads this autumn/winter 'cause the south pole will be there waving it's magic 'balancing wand'. Nor will we see poor ice development across the pole leading to another year of very low summer ice because, this year we have the south pole looking after us. No early snow melt ,no albedo flip ,no record melts across Greenland and both northern sea routes (oh ,and the cross polar route the Chinese took) will be shut 'cause the south pole is now in the game making everything balance out............

You seem to be alone in all those thoughts, can't say that I've seen anyone here claiming that Antarctic ice will negate the loss of Arctic ice. All I've seen are folk saying the Antarctic ice is growing and to be fair, it is, record breakingly so.

How about giving the antagonism a break eh, you never know, you may end up convincing more people to swing to your favoured side of this debate if you stop with the condescending tone - wasps and honey.....

[stewfox]

A good overview of the summer conditions and the Arctic sea ice minimum and well as the Antarctic Maximum by the NSIDC

http://nsidc.org/arc...mer-and-winter/

In the Arctic when the wind blows the ice out it melts in the Antarctic it doesn't , interesting.

[Gray-Wolf]

In the Arctic when the wind blows the ice out it melts in the Antarctic it doesn't , interesting.

??

Even the ice factory in Bering has a limit where it can no longer sustain ice even in late winter? In the Fram export we have multiyear ice which is able (in the past?) to hold up longer to the warmth but not by much?

Try looking at the latitude of both ice extent max's and then you can see the impct of having a big ice block protecting your rear?

[BornFromTheVoid]

Interesting looking at the comparisons between this year and 2007.

The 850hPa temperatures were slightly higher in 2007 than this year, especially over the Pacific side of the Arctic.

...........................2007 ................... ...................... 2012

The dipole anomaly was much stronger in 2007 than this year, although overall a mildly +ve dipole was still in place during the summer.

...........................2007 .................... ...................... 2012

This is a continuation of the dipole pattern which has been so prevalent since 2000, so it seems no let up so far.

.....Summer SLP Anom 1990-1999 ......................... Summer SLP Anom 2000-2012

So both lower temperature and less wind forcing the sea ice out, yet we smash the 2007 minimum. Gives an idea as to how fragile the ice is now

Edited October 4, 2012 by BornFromTheVoid

[pottyprof]

I think we smashed the 2007 record purely by the fact the ice was a lot younger/thinner. This was always going to be a problem if we had another summer where heat was being pumped up there and I think in a few camps it was well anticipated. We need a good 5 years of below average temperatures through the melt season for there to be any chance of a half decent recovery I think. Until we get that as a base I'd expect more of the same as we had this year and further reductions.

[quest4peace]

I'm not going to worry Q4P as I've been told that the Antarctic is doing some kind of 'balancing act' with the pole so all that energy flooding into the northern atmosphere will be somehow magicked away by the south polar sea ice?

We will not see any odd jet stream behaviour due to lessened temp/pressure grads this autumn/winter 'cause the south pole will be there waving it's magic 'balancing wand'. Nor will we see poor ice development across the pole leading to another year of very low summer ice because, this year we have the south pole looking after us. No early snow melt ,no albedo flip ,no record melts across Greenland and both northern sea routes (oh ,and the cross polar route the Chinese took) will be shut 'cause the south pole is now in the game making everything balance out............

Blimey

Arctic temps at above 80 degrees north have dropped near average though if i'm reading that right ?

Daily mean temperature and climate north of the 80th northern parallel

Edited October 5, 2012 by quest4peace

[laserguy]

I'm not going to worry.........

Now that would be a first.

[Devonian]

Now that would be a first.

What has attacking the character of a poster here got to do with Arctic sea ice?

[Gray-Wolf]

You seem to be alone in all those thoughts, can't say that I've seen anyone here claiming that Antarctic ice will negate the loss of Arctic ice. All I've seen are folk saying the Antarctic ice is growing and to be fair, it is, record breakingly so.

So Hun, I'm the only person to have interpreted the current fixation on the Antarctic as an attempt to both deflect attention from this summers Arctic meltdown and also to try and calm any fears that the rapid changes to the Arctic might drive by pointing to the opposite end of the world as some kind of 'negative' to what has occured up north?

I'd be interested to hear from both sides of the debate as to just what that record daily amount meant to them if I'm so far off the plot?

I think we smashed the 2007 record purely by the fact the ice was a lot younger/thinner. This was always going to be a problem if we had another summer where heat was being pumped up there and I think in a few camps it was well anticipated. We need a good 5 years of below average temperatures through the melt season for there to be any chance of a half decent recovery I think. Until we get that as a base I'd expect more of the same as we had this year and further reductions.

The danger always has to be the re-currance of a 'perfect storm synoptic' though P.P.? If we are told that these are a cyclical event with a 10 to 20yr period then any ice surviving a few summers needs to be tough enough to survive such a synoptic? The way we see the Arctic function a.t.m. seems to place the older, thicker ice along the Greenland N.shore and the Canadian Archipelago (with the odd bit in the 'babies arm from Beaufort to Siberia). All of this ice is in the trans Arctic drift and so could easily be flushed out over a high export summer like 07'?

The other thing i feel I have to mention is the changes now occuring to the ocean itself. How many years under the cover of ice do you imagine we need to re-build the structure of the 'old Arctic'? We seem to only need one large storm to push wave osscilation under ice (up to 2m thick) and mix out some of the surface horizons (as we saw with the oct 11' storm over on the bering side of the basin?).

To me ice survival currently is down to location and not age/thickness with only N.Greenland and the pole holding onto ice. The massive reduction in thickness (5m down to <2m) of the ice along the Greenland coast this Aug makes me wonder just how thikc the ice needs to be to escape summer melt ieven in the fasvoured spots?

[jethro]

So Hun, I'm the only person to have interpreted the current fixation on the Antarctic as an attempt to both deflect attention from this summers Arctic meltdown and also to try and calm any fears that the rapid changes to the Arctic might drive by pointing to the opposite end of the world as some kind of 'negative' to what has occured up north?

I'd be interested to hear from both sides of the debate as to just what that record daily amount meant to them if I'm so far off the plot?

I haven't seen anyone claim that growth in the Antarctic ice negates the loss of the Arctic. I've seen people interested in the growth in Antarctica; record growth IS interesting.

I think because your focus is so fixed upon the Arctic you're mis-interpreting other people and their interest in the opposite end of the globe. Attention to ice loss in the Arctic is understandable during the melt season, attention to ice growth during the winter is also understandable, particularly when the melt season has been so disastrous.

However, there is more than enough room in this debate to discuss what is happening in the SH, global warming is precisely that, global. To be fair GW, you do discuss the SH and Antarctic ice but usually only to focus attention upon what is melting/calving down there. There is more to the story than a warming/melting peninsula, there's an entire continent to learn more about and record ice growth is part of that learning.

You fixate upon record melt in the Arctic, others may fixate upon record growth in Antartica - both are part of this debate, both are important. It could be argued that your idea that people are attempting to deflect attention away from the Arctic by focussing upon record growth in the SH, is an attempt to deflect attention away from that record ice growth. It's a claim which can be cut both ways. My own personal opinion is that it's a needless claim from either side, record ice loss in one hemisphere is important, record ice growth in the other hemisphere is important too. We're all grown ups here, surely it should be possible to discuss both without personalising the debate and inferring claims/counter claims that no one is actually making.

[laserguy]

So Hun, I'm the only person to have interpreted the current fixation on the Antarctic as an attempt to both deflect attention from this summers Arctic meltdown

Nah,the misplaced hysteria will just be ramped up a notch to deflect the situation in Antarctica! Can't be having that now, like dragging out flatulent ol' uncle Ernie who threatens to spoil the party.

[Interitus]

Blimey

Arctic temps at above 80 degrees north have dropped near average though if i'm reading that right ?

Daily mean temperature and climate north of the 80th northern parallel

Yes that's right, but this is about the only area with ice cover. Below 80°N there is mostly open sea and temperatures are very much above normal.

[quest4peace]

Yes that's right, but this is about the only area with ice cover. Below 80°N there is mostly open sea and temperatures are very much above normal.

Seems there are too many variables associated with the arctic to pin anything down solidly. Only thing that we can definitely confirm is the ice is vanishing at an alarming rate each year.

[Gray-Wolf]

The DMI 80N can be misleading if viewed as an 'Arctic wide' temp guide. Over summer we seem to have a lot of folk focus on that temp as some kind of guide to the rest of the basin. Sadly, at present at least, all it measures over summer is melting ice at those high lats and so hovers around zero.

Before we had such widescale open water we would now be seeing low temps across the ice pack. As such, where the ocean is still open water, we are seeing notable anoms above 10c in some cases. The only section of the basin posting 'normal' or lower than normal is the pole and the waters off NE Greenland (over the ice there?) I do have to wonder what scale of energy is being delivered to the atmosphere if so much of the basin is so much warmer than we are used to it being and how all this extra energy will start to impact the northern hemisphere circulation via impacts on the Jet?

Are we starting to see forecasts for static /retrogressive lows or large stable H.P.'s across the U.S./Atlantic/Europe yet?

[BornFromTheVoid]

Those surface air temperature anomalies are really climbing over the Beaufort sea, up over 13C now.