Jump to content
Snow?
Local
Radar
Cold?
IGNORED

Arctic Ice Discussion. 2013 Melt Season


pottyprof

Recommended Posts

Posted
  • Location: Napton on the Hill Warwickshire 500ft
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and heatwave
  • Location: Napton on the Hill Warwickshire 500ft

Not as simple as that, also depends on the refreeze this winter and even then recovery is probably unlikely for western Eurasia for some time. Papers such as this from last year - http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00466.1?journalCode=clim show the retreat for the Barents sea at least is in large part due to the inflow of Atlantic water.

The flow rate between Norway and Svalbard peaks at maybe up to a km/day http://icesjms.oxfordjournals.org/content/54/3/310.full.pdf.

Meanwhile the temperature in this area on the Norwegian island of Hopen has been a full 4 degrees above average over the last year http://www.yr.no/place/Norway/Svalbard/Hopen/statistics.html so that is a lot of warmer than normal Atlantic water to flush out of the system.

 

Obviously we would need a below average winter, we want increase in multi year ice and volume (above 2010-13 figures). Your first article refers to a period up to 2007. The second refers to a local weather site.

 

IJIS has taken a big drop yesterday 112k

 

http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm

 

Its likely we will see just below a sub 5m (cf 3.5m min last year) 

 

If we were up 1.5m up on last year it wouldn't take lot to get 6m average.

 

10% increase in volume is easily obtainable

 

http://www.thearcticinstitute.org/p/arctic-sea-ice-extent-and-volume.html

 

 

Edited by stewfox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: bingley,west yorks. 100 asl
  • Location: bingley,west yorks. 100 asl

But we would need favourable conditions over both summer and winter?!?!.

And for a few years, also one bad season could wreck a build up?,thats how finely balanced it is imo.

Edited by joggs
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Leeds/Bradford border, 185 metres above sea level, around 600 feet
  • Location: Leeds/Bradford border, 185 metres above sea level, around 600 feet

Any update regarding the daily fall/gain?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Camborne
  • Location: Camborne

Latest NSIDC update.

 

Sea ice continued its late-season summer decline through August at a near-average pace. Ice extent is still well above last year’s level, but below the 1981 to 2010 average. Open water was observed in the ice cover close to the North Pole, while in the Antarctic, sea ice has been at a record high the past few days.

 

Sea ice extent for August 2013 averaged 6.09 million square kilometers (2.35 million square miles). This was 1.03 million square kilometers (398,000 square miles) below the 1981 to 2010 average for August, but well above the level recorded last year, which was the lowest September extent in the satellite record. Ice extent this August was similar to the years 2008 to 2010. These contrasts in ice extent from one year to the next highlight the year-to-year variability attending the overall, long-term decline in sea ice extent.

Extent in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas has dropped below average, after near average conditions in July. The only region with average extent is the East Siberian Sea.

 

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: west croydon (near lombard)
  • Location: west croydon (near lombard)

Ice buildup in the Amundsen Gulf is responsible for barge delays that have many Northern coastal communities running short on supplies.

Normally, a supply barge arrives in the area in early summer to replenish stocks of fuel and other necessities in those communities. But this year, that trip is being held up by ice. As much as 30 to 40 per cent of the Arctic Ocean remains covered in ice.

"We have not seen ice with this type of coverage in quite a few years and I really don't know how far back we might've seen it," says Bill Smith, a spokesman with Northern Transportation Company Ltd., which services the communities.

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/story/2013/09/03/north-barge-delays.html

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Napton on the Hill Warwickshire 500ft
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and heatwave
  • Location: Napton on the Hill Warwickshire 500ft

We are still miles below the 2007 volume whatever positives you want to draw from extent.

 

I know people post 30/40 years of ice volume thickness but there not really that accurate

 

Obviously CryoSat-2 launch in 2010 as helped.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryosat-2

 

Even if we take the PIOMAS figures as fact

 

http://neven1.typepad.com/.a/6a0133f03a1e37970b01901e9aac9b970b-pi

 

We have a significant improvement (ice volume) on last year

 

You can also see how ice volume can fluctuate and we are clearly not miles behind 2007 and you can see how 2010 almost caught up with 2007 by October.

 

Lets see how it all pans out.

Edited by stewfox
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Napton on the Hill Warwickshire 500ft
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and heatwave
  • Location: Napton on the Hill Warwickshire 500ft

""""""Only six years ago, the BBC reported that the Arctic would be ice-free in summer by 2013, citing a scientist in the US who claimed this was a ‘conservative’ forecast. Perhaps it was their confidence that led more than 20 yachts to try to sail the Northwest Passage from the Atlantic to  the Pacific this summer. As of last week, all these vessels were stuck in the ice, some at the eastern end of the passage in Prince Regent Inlet, others further west at Cape Bathurst"""""""""

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415191/Global-cooling-Arctic-ice-caps-grows-60-global-warming-predictions.html

Edited by stewfox
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
  • Weather Preferences: Thunder, snow, heat, sunshine...
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.

Monthly August ice extent for 1979 to 2013 shows a decline of 10.6% per decade.

I counted 15 'recoveries' in there, knocker...Posted Image

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Purley, Surrey - 246 Ft ASL
  • Weather Preferences: January 1987 / July 2006
  • Location: Purley, Surrey - 246 Ft ASL

Have you read some of the comments at the end of the daily fail article! Even more nutters than on here ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Napton on the Hill Warwickshire 500ft
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and heatwave
  • Location: Napton on the Hill Warwickshire 500ft

Have you read some of the comments at the end of the daily fail article! Even more nutters than on here Posted Image

 

I assume you mean the Daily Mail ? There not 'nutters' but probably take a bias cherry picking 'bit of news' as the gospel. Only 1 in 10 post from Jo Public has any relevance to reality.

 

 

 

 

Edited by stewfox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Purley, Surrey - 246 Ft ASL
  • Weather Preferences: January 1987 / July 2006
  • Location: Purley, Surrey - 246 Ft ASL

I assume you mean the Daily Mail ? There not 'nutters' but probably take a bias cherry picking 'bit of news' as the gospel. Only 1 in 10 post from Jo Public has any relevance to reality.

The nutters comment was a bit of a joke and the daily mail is a poor excuse for a paper.I forgot how serious it was in here......I shall stick to reading and keep my mouth shut.
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: SW Sheffield (210m asl)
  • Location: SW Sheffield (210m asl)

Indeed Pete. It illustrates why it's very dangerous, whether taking the optimiistic or pessimistic view, to just consider one or two years. The last two is probably the best example.

I agree, but I would have preferred the X axis to start at zero.  Its also a shame we do not have this data before 1979.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: inter drumlin South Tyrone Blackwater river valley surrounded by the last last ice age...
  • Weather Preferences: jack frost
  • Location: inter drumlin South Tyrone Blackwater river valley surrounded by the last last ice age...

Posted Image

 

Area continues to reduce by CT's measure at  @ 30,000 sq km a day . Also dropped below 2009 today . I am delighted to be surprised by the powers of recovery in the system now that an extreme thaw event moves into the realms of impossibility for the Arctic !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: inter drumlin South Tyrone Blackwater river valley surrounded by the last last ice age...
  • Weather Preferences: jack frost
  • Location: inter drumlin South Tyrone Blackwater river valley surrounded by the last last ice age...

Recovery?

 Where ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know people post 30/40 years of ice volume thickness but there not really that accurate

 

Obviously CryoSat-2 launch in 2010 as helped.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryosat-2

 

Even if we take the PIOMAS figures as fact

 

http://neven1.typepad.com/.a/6a0133f03a1e37970b01901e9aac9b970b-pi

 

We have a significant improvement (ice volume) on last year

 

You can also see how ice volume can fluctuate and we are clearly not miles behind 2007 and you can see how 2010 almost caught up with 2007 by October.

 

Lets see how it all pans out.

 

From the latest PIOMAS data updated since that graph and taking the last day 243 (Sept 1st) as the minimum (it's always actually been later than this)  there has indeed been a significant increase in volume over last year due mainly the second highest volume increase followed by a melt which was actually bang on the long term average.

Another freeze/melt cycle similar to the past 12 months would see the minimum above 2007 and equal to 2009. Continuing at this rate would see average volume return by 2016/7.

 

However, this has been the second highest year on year net ice volume gain on the record, the chance of it happening in consecutive years must be considered remote at best. The volume decline has been inexorable since the beginning of recording, not just in the past decade - 24 out of 34 years has seen a net loss. Only twice have there been back to back gains and never 3 years in a row.

Yearly minimum volume	Loss	Gain1980	-0.716	1981	-3.55	1982		0.8061983		1.6821984	-0.597	1985	-0.005	1986		1.461987	-0.759	1988	-0.323	1989	-0.204	1990	-0.97	1991	-0.203	1992		1.3881993	-2.63	1994		1.3771995	-2.426	1996		2.531997	-0.537	1998	-1.666	1999	-0.596	2000		0.0382001		1.2252002	-1.387	2003	-0.552	2004	-0.359	2005	-0.722	2006	-0.166	2007	-2.535	2008		0.6142009	-0.179	2010	-2.465	2011	-0.411	2012	-0.756	2013		1.816
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Epsom, Surrey
  • Location: Epsom, Surrey

The nutters comment was a bit of a joke and the daily mail is a poor excuse for a paper.I forgot how serious it was in here......I shall stick to reading and keep my mouth shut.

Couldn't agree more. Gave up trying to comment and learn a long time ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Eastbourne, East Sussex (work in Mid Sussex)
  • Location: Eastbourne, East Sussex (work in Mid Sussex)
 

 

Arctic sea ice delusions strike the Mail on Sunday and Telegraph
 
Both UK periodicals focus on short-term noise and ignore the rapid long-term Arctic sea ice death spiral
 
When it comes to climate science reporting, the Mail on Sunday and Telegraph are only reliable in the sense that you can rely on them to usually get the science wrong. This weekend's Arctic sea ice articles from David Rose of the Mail and Hayley Dixon at the Telegraph unfortunately fit that pattern.
 
Both articles claimed that Arctic sea ice extent grew 60 percent in August 2013 as compared to August 2012. While this factoid is technically true, it's also largely irrelevant. For one thing, the annual Arctic sea ice minimum occurs in September – we're not there yet. And while this year's minimum extent will certainly be higher than last year's, that's not the least bit surprising. As University of Reading climate scientist Ed Hawkins noted last year,
 
"Around 80% of the ~100 scientists at the Bjerknes [Arctic climate science] conference thought that there would be MORE Arctic sea-ice in 2013, compared to 2012."
 
Regression toward the Mean
 
The reason so many climate scientists predicted more ice this year than last is quite simple. There's a principle in statistics known as "regression toward the mean," which is the phenomenon that if an extreme value of a variable is observed, the next measurement will generally be less extreme. In other words, we should not often expect to observe records in consecutive years. 2012 shattered the previous record low sea ice extent; hence 'regression towards the mean' told us that 2013 would likely have a higher minimum extent.
 
The amount of Arctic sea ice left at the end of the annual melt season is mainly determined by two factors – natural variability (weather patterns and ocean cycles), and human-caused global warming. The Arctic has lost 75 percent of its summer sea ice volume over the past three decades primarily due to human-caused global warming, but in any given year the weather can act to either preserve more or melt more sea ice. Last year the weather helped melt more ice, while this year the weather helped preserve more ice.
 
Last year I created an animated graphic called the 'Arctic Escalator' that predicted the behavior we're now seeing from the Mail on Sunday and Telegraph. Every year when the weather acts to preserve more ice than the previous year, we can rely on climate contrarians to claim that Arctic sea ice is "rebounding" or "recovering" and there's nothing to worry about. Given the likelihood that 2013 would not break the 2012 record, I anticipated that climate contrarians would claim this year as yet another "recovery" year, exactly as the Mail on Sunday and Telegraph have done.

 

Posted Image

Arctic sea ice extent data, 1980–2012. Data from NSIDC

 

 

In short, this year's higher sea ice extent is merely due to the fact that last year's minimum extent was record-shattering, and the weather was not as optimal for sea ice loss this summer. However, the long-term trend is one of rapid Arctic sea ice decline, and research has shown this is mostly due to human-caused global warming.

 
When Will the Arctic be Ice-Free?
 
Both Rose and Dixon referenced a 2007 BBC article quoting Professor Wieslaw Maslowski saying that the Arctic could be ice free in the summer of 2013. In a 2011 BBC article, he predicted ice-free Arctic seas by 2016 "plus or minus three years." Other climate scientists believe this prediction is too pessimistic, and expect the first ice-free Arctic summers by 2040.
 
It's certainly difficult to predict exactly when an ice-free Arctic summer will occur. While climate research has shown that the Arctic sea ice decline is mostly human-caused, there may also be a natural component involved. The remaining sea ice may abruptly vanish, or it may hold on for a few decades longer. What we do know is that given its rapid decline, an ice-free Arctic appears to be not a question of if, but when.
 
Continuing Global Warming
 
Both articles also claimed that "some scientists" are predicting that we're headed into a period of global cooling. Both named just one scientist making this claim – Professor Tsonis of the University of Wisconsin, whose research shows that slowed global surface warming is only temporary. In fact, Tsonis' co-author Kyle Swanson wrote,
 
"What do our results have to do with Global Warming, i.e., the century-scale response to greenhouse gas emissions? VERY LITTLE, contrary to claims that others have made on our behalf."
 
Both articles also wrongly claimed that global warming has "paused" since 1997. In reality, global surface temperatures have warmed over the past 15 years, albeit more slowly than during the previous 15 years. It is possible to cherry pick a shorter time frame over which global surface temperatures haven't warmed, as I illustrated in my other animated 'Escalator' graphic.

 

Posted Image

Average of NASA GISS, NOAA NCDC, and HadCRUT4 monthly global surface temperature anomalies from January 1970 through November 2012 (green) with linear trends applied to the timeframes Jan '70 - Oct '77, Apr '77 - Dec '86, Sep '87 - Nov '96, Jun '97 - Dec '02, and Nov '02 - Nov '1

 

Howeverr, the opposite is true of the overall warming of the planet – Earth has accumulated more heat over the past 15 years than during the prior 15 years.

 

Posted Image

Global heat accumulation data (ocean heating in blue; land, atmosphere, and ice heating in red) from Nuccitelli et al. (2012)

 

Recent research strongly suggests that the main difference between these two periods comes down to ocean heat absorption. Over the past decade, heat has been transferred more efficiently to the deep oceans, offsetting much of the human-caused warming at the surface. During the previous few decades, the opposite was true, with heat being transferred less efficiently into the oceans, causing more rapid warming at the surface. This is due to ocean cycles, but cycles are cyclical – meaning it's only a matter of time before another warm cycle occurs, causing accelerating surface warming (as Tsonis' research shows).

 
It would be foolhardy for anyone to predict future global cooling, and those few who are so foolish are unwilling to put their money where their mouth is, as my colleague John Abraham found out when challenging one to a bet, only to find the other party unwilling to stand behind it.
 
Rose and Dixon Invent an IPCC 'Crisis Meeting'
 
Both articles also claimed the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), whose Fifth Assessment Report is due out in a few weeks, has been forced "to hold a crisis meeting." This claim made both articles even though Ed Hawkins noted,
 
"I told David Rose on the phone and by email on Thursday about the IPCC process and lack of 'crisis' meeting."
 
Unfortunately that didn't stop Rose from inventing this meeting, or Dixon from repeating Rose's fictional reporting in the Telegraph.
 
Yes, Humans are Driving Global Warming
 
Finally, both articles quoted climate scientist Judith Curry claiming that the anticipated IPCC statement of 95 percent confidence that humans are the main cause of the current global warming is unjustified. However, Curry has no expertise in global warming attribution, and has a reputation for exaggerating climate uncertainties. In reality, the confident IPCC statement is based on recent global warming attribution research. More on this once the IPCC report is actually published – any current commentaries on the draft report are premature.
 
Shoddy Climate Reporting
 
These two articles at the Mail on Sunday and Telegraph continue the unfortunate trend of shoddy climate reporting in the two periodicals, particularly from David Rose. They suffer from cherry picking short-term data while ignoring the long-term human-caused trends, misrepresenting climate research, repeating long-debunked myths, and inventing IPCC meetings despite being told by climate scientists that these claims are pure fiction.
 
Based on their history of shoddy reporting, the safest course of action when reading a climate article in the Mail on Sunday or Telegraph is to assume they're misrepresentations or falsehoods until you can verify the facts therein for yourself.

 

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013/sep/09/climate-change-arctic-sea-ice-delusions

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: North York Moors
  • Location: North York Moors

That's just Dana Nutticelli from SKS, an activist site which is chummy with The Guardian.However the Mail piece is naive to say the least.Fact remains that 'scientists' who should know better extrapolated a single unusually low year 2007 into 'no ice by 2013' - this was translated into scaremonger headlines by the BBC and others - who should also know better - and needless to say they now look foolish.AGW reporting is littered with overblown scaremongering claims like this, you could write a book and one day someone will. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
  • Weather Preferences: Thunder, snow, heat, sunshine...
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.

^^^ Woah, I bet those journalists feel like they just got torn a new one lol... Embarrassing.   ^^^

I'm not so sure; I get the distinct impression that - so long as the paychecks keep coming in - they'll be more than happy to stick to their agenda, of coordinated misinformation?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...