Arctic Ice Discussion. 2013 Melt Season

[VillagePlank]

Sorry chaps, the observational evidence, doesn't play out with your theory. I'm sure it will dip below the 'normal' range soon .... I hope so, for GWs benefit :lol:

[gagerg]

Yeah BFTV, The 'eckman pumping' gave me reason to head scratch esp. the 'scale' of the effect?

 

I was trying to highlight the pack fragility and that we may well see a pool of low concentration ice/open water before most coastal areas are clear of ice?

 

If you wanted to most efficiently melt out, via top melt, the pack then starting in the middle under the highest solar input and then working to the outer pack would be a novel but effective approach?

 

In 4 or 5 days we might well see a lot of open water where the pack has been ripped apart and if the next low camps in a similar position, and does a similar job, we will have a very 'darkened' central region over the solstice? We will also now start to see the high temps that we currently do across NW Europe and into Eurasia seeping into the basin.

 

If we still look to be holding onto the ice by June's end i will start to favour us ending higher than last summer (area) but I find it hard to believe that the next 3 weeks will see some very high melt rates?

 

Hopefully we'll have had lots of 'Recovery ' type posts from all the usual suspects by then ?

 

To see the Arctic melt out before the end of June.....

[Gray-Wolf]

Hi sparks!

 

June will act as June always does? When majority ice was 3m+ and perennial then we'd still have a lot of 'change' come July 1st. Average melt rates over the same period today (with predominantly 2m FY ice) will naturally leave us with a Swiss cheese pack.

 

Current Synopitics hint at this impacting the central region badly this June and so I'm expecting a badly impacted central region allowing much more movement of the peripheral ice (re-compressing the central region?) so a very 'Topsy Turvey' extent couple of months once this central region is done with?

 

My other point (earlier) is that we've needed wait for the 'Laptev Bite' to appear to see the central ice impacted in recent years (and not just nibbled away at the edges?) so how will this novel event now impact the pattern of ice loss? Will it enable peak insolation full access to the weakened ice in the central region region and the open water we are now seeing appearing there (due to the rotational stresses of the low)?

 

EDIT: Thinking on it could this be the first year we see the DMI 80N not stick to freezing over the summer period??? How will the Deniers explain this if ice losses only 'equal ' last years efforts (ish)?

Edited June 1, 2013 by Gray-Wolf

[VillagePlank]

Exactly who is 'denying' what, GW? I quite agree that arctic ice year by year is a function of synoptics; of course, it's the underlying trend that's important.

[Gray-Wolf]

Exactly who is 'denying' what, GW? I quite agree that arctic ice year by year is a function of synoptics; of course, it's the underlying trend that's important.

 

There seems to be a body of folk 'denying' that what we observe across the basin is nothing 'out of the ordinary' and merely a product of 'natural forcings' that have impacted the basin throughout human history.

 

This body of folk appear to believe that a few cool summers across the basin will undo the damage to the old workings of the Basin and return things to normal over the course of a few years (well within the 'perfect storm' cycle of 10 to 20 yrs).

 

At present those folk are gaining cheer from the 'extent' figures this early melt season and neglecting to mention the anomalous ice distribution , compared to the noughties, that the season began with.

 

Throughout the noughties we mainly saw low ice in Baffin and Barentsz (and Kara?)  with higher 'peripheral' ice amounts Okhotsk/Bering.

 

This has added into the initial losses, aided and abetted by the AO's change of heart (keeping the cold inside the basin?) leaving extent figures ,for the time of year, above the noughties average?

 

As the season progresses Barentsz/Baffin/Kara will become ice free and 'normal/average (or worse?)' extent figures will return.

 

You may recall me warning this sites adherents to the above about the folly of parading high/average extent figures, come winters end, when most of the excess was positioned outside the basin. 

 

Over winter we have seen ice 'drift' into these regions (only for the central ice to re-grow). with the same synoptics in place but no ice formation these synoptics will lead to melt out of the peripheral regions and an opening up of the central pack.

 

The early , and long lived. fracture event has compounded this by leaving the larger part of the pack in small floes cemented by late grown infill. As such i would expect to see ice losses around the periphery drop as normal but the central ice produce a lot more 'open water/leads' for this early in the season? The impact that peak insolation will have on a pack so stacked is open to conjecture but i suggest it will not lead to ice retention?

Edited June 1, 2013 by Gray-Wolf

[pottyprof]

And where exactly does anything say anywhere that the condition of the ice is definitely down to AGW?  By repeatedly saying it is over and over and over doesn't make it true.

 

*Stands back and waits for the soap box to make an appearance*

[Methuselah]

A more reasoned statement might be: AGW must be in part responsible for the recent rapid decline in Arctic ice-extent?

[Gray-Wolf]

I don't think anyone ever says "It's all AGW" P.P.?

 

What appears is that 'natural variation' continues ,as ever, but some other forcing is allowing the Arctic to fall beyond other Basin wide changes ( remember we were in a cool down across the north P.P. and that 'Orbital forcing' should still be growing but it stopped, and reversed, at the end of the 1800's).

 

So we are looking not only for a forcing above and beyond the 'natural' we see in the records but also something powerful to overcome the 'Orbital forcing' as well as the 'natural variation'? (this is why it is a 'double worry' as once this , to you, 'Mystery forcing' percolates down into the areas where the orbital forcing was not impacting temps what will we see occur there????)

Edited June 1, 2013 by Gray-Wolf

[4wd]

 

 

June will act as June always does? When majority ice was 3m+ and perennial then we'd still have a lot of 'change' come July 1st. 

2013 is at or near the top of recent years, DMi temperatures are significantly below normal.

For your scenario an unprecedented near vertical drop in the graphs needs to start tomorrow.2013 will not follow the pattern of recent summers, there has been an albedo flip and much of the Northern Hemisphere is still gripped by unusual cold patterns.

[BornFromTheVoid]

2013 is at or near the top of recent years, DMi temperatures are significantly below normal.

For your scenario an unprecedented near vertical drop in the graphs needs to start tomorrow.2013 will not follow the pattern of recent summers, there has been an albedo flip and much of the Northern Hemisphere is still gripped by unusual cold patterns.

 

What albedo flip are you referring to? Are you anticipating below average northern hemisphere temperatures for May?

[Gray-Wolf]

As June records fall in May in Scandiwegian lands??

 

Most of the temps we have seen across the N.Hemisphere are 'average' temps for those regions but they have had a run of abnormal warm since the 07' ice drop. Are we not seeing the start of the post 12' ice drop influence or is it just solar max mixing things up?

 

As for 'near vertical drops' (or 'Flash melting') I do think the ice condition will lead to some of that as areas of similar thickness 'blink out' in later July/early Aug but, for now, we will start to see rapid losses begin to occur over the coming week.

 

The low snow anoms across much of Eurasia that we now see will lead to a rapid warm up of those regions so look for the melt of coastal East Siberian/Kara/Barentsz over the next 4 weeks.

 

Looking at the Modis piccies I'd think we'll see a lot of 'corrections' over the coming week as the H.P. sets up and clear skies allow sensors a better look at the ice? I'd also suggest that we'll see some action across the CAA as the current central basin low migrates and deepens there.

 

Let's see how the graphs look this time next week eh?

[VillagePlank]

And cold records echo in the English CET, GW?

[keithlucky]

Arctic ice continues to expand http://t.co/yAtBoXl5Ss

Edited June 2, 2013 by keithlucky

[Methuselah]

Arctic ice continues to expand http://t.co/yAtBoXl5Ss

Ah, another recovery?

[Gray-Wolf]

As BFTV muted Sparks, it will be the N.Hemisphere monthly temp that shows us how things are? If it comes up 'average' then any wealth of cold extremes must be being balanced by warm extremes and what does this tell us?

 

If we are in a period of climate extremes it would serve us well to know what is driving them?Agriculture and energy suppliers would prefer to have some idea of the ballpark the operate in than run blind each season?

 

Back to the ice. The drop off appears to be underway and I would expect it to now continue as normal for June melt? The scale of losses will be tempered by the state of the pack but the 'temps' will now, and for the next few months, be so as to see losses somewhere in the basin that outweigh 'gains (in area and volume). Due to the way things are stacked 'Extent' may be a bit of a see-saw for a while though?

Arctic ice continues to expand http://t.co/yAtBoXl5Ss

 

Eh???

[PeteG]

Arctic ice continues to expand http://t.co/yAtBoXl5Ss

Perhaps you should read these articles and check the facts before posting links to them. 269 million sq km of extra ice would cover half the planet.

[Gray-Wolf]

I've postulated for many years that a portion of the folk 'denying' the extent of impacts from AGW do so through fear of the 'plotted' consequences. As such they grab onto anything that appears to give them the 'safety' of those predictions of future impacts being in error (esp. if young enough to have their lives blighted by such impacts)?

 

The first stage of grieving is 'denial' and folk will physically lean towards denying the loss of the person (both consciously and unconsciously)...I've known folk set places , and cook for, the deceased over six months after the loss of the person?

 

I'm sure K.L. means well and is honestly mystified by why folk should pay attention to a thing the "so isn't happening"?

 

Anyhow, as noted JAXA is now starting to plot the recent losses and , once conditions allow better 'vision' the sensors will pick up on what we can discern through low cloud/Fogand we will see a few big adjustments to extent/area over the next week?

Edited June 2, 2013 by Gray-Wolf

[keithlucky]

Sceptics thread locked

Edited June 2, 2013 by keithlucky

[VillagePlank]

And that's the problem as using sea-ice extent as a proxy for global temperatures. Oh wait, we're not to look at global temperatures any more, it's only the northern hemisphere. Oh wait .... I'm soooo confused. Perhaps if the goalposts stayed in the same place?? Mind you that's never stopped anyone in the past. in 1970 CO2 'suddenly' affected the climate. In 2013, 'suddenly' the oceans can transport energy to the inner depths. I do wonder who is 'denying' what, some times.

Edited June 2, 2013 by Sparkicle

[Gray-Wolf]

This thread looks at the melt season of the Arctic ice...end of?

 

I'd agree some folk look a tad confused by this notion but 'ice' is a 'thing' that , along with other 'things' is best seen in 'Volume'? With this measure oddities like'the 4 yr olds quandary' do not get in the way (offer a four year old a toffee rolled really thin so it looks 'big' and two toffees rolled together and see which they choose......most of us grow out of this by 7yrs old?)

 

By the last measure we had less ice than ever before recorded (yes...since we started to record and 'yes' only in the way we have accepted to calculate the volume).

 

We are now into the most active part of the melt season and so from now on one would expect to get regular 'century' losses in extent/area as the warmth of the Northern summer builds and impacts the area within the Arctic circle?

 

As for 'only the northern Hemisphere? Well that's where the Arctic is???

[BornFromTheVoid]

Wrong GW accept the fact that Arctic ice is at a 12 year high http://t.co/EtlejQRqOC . The northern hemisphere experienced the coldest spring  for 50 yrs ,Antarctic sea ice record levels wlll be  broken this year.plus the  Solar cycle 24/25 could produce a similar climate period of 1800 to 1850.

 

Sorry Keith, this ain't the sceptic thread. You can't simply make up claims without some kind of evidence, for which you nor your links have provided.

Arctic sea ice is not at a 12 year high on your graph, closer to 10 lowest for the time of year. Area wise, it may be 12th, volume wise, it's lowest on record at the last reading.

The northern hemisphere has not recorded its coldest Spring in 50 years, but the UK has. They're not interchangeable though. The northern hemisphere, up to April, was at the 10th warmest on record. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2013/4

You don't know what Antarctic sea ice will do, and it doesn't matter here, this is about the Arctic sea ice.

 

Do you expect global temperatures to drop to the levels seen between 1800 and 1850 during the next solar cycle?

Edited June 2, 2013 by BornFromTheVoid

[stewfox]

Sorry Keith, this ain't the sceptic thread. You can't simply make up claims without some kind of evidence, for which you nor your links have provided.

Arctic sea ice is not at a 12 year high on your graph, closer to 10 lowest for the time of year. Area wise, it may be 12th, volume wise, it's lowest on record at the last reading.

The northern hemisphere has not recorded its coldest Spring in 50 years, but the UK has. They're not interchangeable though. The northern hemisphere, up to April, was at the 10th warmest on record. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2013/4

You don't know what Antarctic sea ice will do, and it doesn't matter here, this is about the Arctic sea ice.

 

Do you expect global temperatures to drop to the levels seen between 1800 and 1850 during the next solar cycle?

 

Where did all these volumes figures come from , from decades gone by ?

 

I thought about 2yrs ago a new sat was launched that was going to give us for the first time accurate artic ice volume figures, or have we always had accurate volume figures from the 1970s onwards ? So we can stay without doubt, lowest volume on record ?

 

You also referring to winter periods, the comment was for spring March, April and May and data isn't in yet for the full period.

Edited June 2, 2013 by stewfox

[4wd]

I've postulated for many years that a portion of the folk 'denying' the extent of impacts from AGW do so through fear of the 'plotted' consequences. As such they grab onto anything that appears to give them the 'safety' of those predictions of future impacts being in error (esp. if young enough to have their lives blighted by such impacts)?

 

The first stage of grieving is 'denial' and folk will physically lean towards denying the loss of the person (both consciously and unconsciously)...I've known folk set places , and cook for, the deceased over six months after the loss of the person?

 

I'm sure K.L. means well and is honestly mystified by why folk should pay attention to a thing the "so isn't happening"?

 

Anyhow, as noted JAXA is now starting to plot the recent losses and , once conditions allow better 'vision' the sensors will pick up on what we can discern through low cloud/Fogand we will see a few big adjustments to extent/area over the next week?

What an extraordinary post, you only need look at the stats and currently area is well up on recent years, who is in denial?You seem to have so much invested in death spiral semantics, I fear you may suffer a nervous breakdown if ice responds to recent lack of warming by recovering.As seems possible from this years slow melt. 

[Gray-Wolf]

Cryosat2 confirmed the accuracy of the PIOMAS observations and so helps validate the accuracy of the methodology throughout both their operation and their 'hindcasts' of how ice volumes used to be.

 

If you have no problem with the cryosat 2 data then surely you also accept the validity of the PIOMAS data?

 

Nobody is trying to 'hoodwink' you as to the state of the Arctic sea ice , why would they?, it is a very serious issue with potentially catastrophic ramifications for the whole planet.

 

We may disagree on why ice level began to wane (in a period where the far north should be gently cooling , and in fact was up until the late 1800's, due to the orbital position of the planet currently) but the 'step change' that occurred through the 80's and 90's left the ice prone for the extent/area drop we saw in 07' ( or is there some other reason we lost the majority of ice volume over that period?). Since that time the low ice volume has meant a rapid loss of the last of the 'old'  ,core arctic ice( ice older than ten years and of office block dimensions) to a point where now most all ice is younger than 6 years old (and the majority is first year ice) with an average thickness not much in excess of 2m?

 

This is not a 'pedants' game. The changes are so immense that surely only a fool would try and belittle them?

 

Anyhow , back to the 'new Arctic' and what we can expect of the ice through the rest of the melt cycle.

 

The last years , post 07', seem to point to a part redundancy of the 'old Arctics' workings. Weather that once nurtured ice now actively destroys it ( in the past a 3m loss in thickness would not trouble the core ice...now such a loss leaves open water). Areas that used to be 'nurseries' for paleocryistic ice now consume it. So much is now different, due to age and thickness, that we only have a very short period of reference to compare conditions with (so as to try and predict the rest of our melt season).

 

Folk are trying to find solace in the 'slow start' to this season this time but I would suggest that the 'placement' of the ice, combined with a 'post 2012' circulation regime, has lead to us suffering a 'different' start to the season and nothing more. As BFTV has pointed out ice volume is at record low levels suggesting that even a season more favourable to ice retention than the past 5 years will leave us at troubleingley low volumes come Sept?

 

EDIT: 4? LOL.

Edited June 2, 2013 by Gray-Wolf

[Methuselah]

Let's all just wait for August?