Arctic Sea Ice Discussion 2014/2015: The Refreeze

[knocker]

VIIRS Day/Night Band imagery reveals the amount of motion in the Arctic Ocean sea ice north of Alaska http://go.wisc.edu/7g493j  @NWSAlaska

[knocker]

PIOMAS November 2014

 

http://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2014/11/piomas-november-2014.html

Edited November 9, 2014 by knocker

[keithlucky]

Any thoughts on the storm that looks set to enter Bering? Is it likely to end up in the high Arctic and mess with the ice forming in Beaufort?

Bering Sea storm beat strongest storm record this storm 924mb previous record 925mb set in 1977.The Bering bomb

Edited November 11, 2014 by keithlucky

[Gray-Wolf]

Amazing to think of the diverse impacts that heat engine drives around the northern hemisphere ( from Arctic warmth ( relative) to U.S. cold to our shores and the systems that we will now inherit?

 

Were we entering into a phase where deep ocean warming was ending and surface ocean warming taking over the helm then the ingredients for such disturbances would be ever more common place and so we might expect more energetic exchanges of energy around the globe as imbalances became enhanced ( and nature stepped in to even out those differences). 

 

We just lived through one of the lowest export melt seasons I have ever witnessed. Was this the last act in the 'null' period between the extremes that ran from 07' to 2012  and a 'new' experience of Arctic behaviour set to unfold before us?

 

At present we see Fram again beginning to export ice. Will we see this become as common as it was in the 80's? Will next summer see 'export' again figure in ice loss over melt season?

[knocker]

A NASA Perspective: Four Decades of Sea Ice From Space: The Future

 

Scientists have used satellites to observe the retreat of Arctic sea ice from above. But the bigger challenge – now and in the coming years – is understanding what is happening below.

 

http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/nasa-perspective-four-decades-of-sea-ice-from-space-the-future/#.VGUuw2dAZX4

[keithlucky]

Arctic ice higest for over a decade http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/old_icecover.uk.php

Edited November 15, 2014 by keithlucky

[knocker]

A fair old temp anomaly at the moment.

[stewfox]

A fair old temp anomaly at the moment.

 

Were close to average at present and  the forecast you have posted 8 days hence is above average but its only a forecast out in FI

[BornFromTheVoid]

Were close to average at present and  the forecast you have posted 8 days hence is above average but its only a forecast out in FI

 

One of the charts also shows the present temperature, which is well above average.

 

here's another

 

[stewfox]

One of the charts also shows the present temperature, which is well above average.

 

here's another

 

 

 

Were looking at sea ice not land based temps and much if the Arctic where the ocean is , is average or below

 

The DMI fig ...80N north 'all ocean' is average or about 10c lower then last year.

 

http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php

Edited November 18, 2014 by stewfox

[BornFromTheVoid]

stewfox, on 18 Nov 2014 - 22:35, said:

Were looking at sea ice not land based temps and much if the Arctic where the ocean is , is average or below

 

The DMI fig ...80N north 'all ocean' is average or about 10c lower then last year.

 

http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php

 

 

I'm aware of what we're looking at and even still, the general Arctic ocean area was and is above average. The large area of very large positive anomalies vastly outweighs the small area of slightly negative anomalies, surely you can at least see that?

 

How has north of 80N been compared to average most of this Autumn? How was it 2 days ago when the original posts were made? How does it compare to the rest of the Arctic ocean area?

Here's how things stand for the 18th

 

[stewfox]

High Arctic temps remain 10c below last year and below average.

 

http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php

[Gray-Wolf]

Links broken stew?

 

I think the fact we saw another year without a disastrous low tells folk we had a year better for retention stew? We should not think that Nature is beaten and all we have is AGW warming across the planet? We may be seeing some systems now acting 'odd' under the constant AGW forcing but we still expect 'Nino' years to plump up global temps or PDO-ve /IPO negative draw global temps down?

 

What has changed is the Arctic sea ices ability to fend off 'perfect melt storm' type synoptics ( as it did prior to 07' every 10 to 20 yrs) leaving us with the prospect of seeing a winter basin consisting solely of FY ice. This would be a game changer as we have no proxy for the behaviour of the basin under such conditions and how the accrued summer heat from the Arctic Ocean will impact Northern regions come Autumn as the ocean disgorges this energy back into the atmosphere?

 

We have until 2017 ( at the earliest or 2027 at the latest) to grow a pack, similar in scale and dimension, to the one we had in 97' to stand a chance of seeing ice stand up to the next cyclical 'perfect melt storm. I'd hate for folk to be lulled into believing that we have seen the worst from the arctic and that things are now turning around only for the next 'average' melt/export year to throw all of that away and leave us looking at another 2012 (or worse).  

[Midlands Ice Age]

Re the above posts.....

I see that Stu is trying to keep the subject to 'current' ice conditioins during the refreeze.

The usual contingent (perhaps only temporarily) are not very happy about the current state of the refreeze and are again starting (trying?), to subvert the thread by talking about their own future predictions and starting to look outside thhe polar ice cap. By the way GFTV why not include the N American cold in yout total NH views? I think its pretty normal if you look at that.

Everything (ncluding the ice) is back to BAU over the last 15 years. Can we please keep to discussion to the CURRENT ice trends, otherwise the thread will once again be trashed.

[knocker]

I was just about to post these charts as I thought current weather conditions relevant to this thread. If it's the considered opinion that they are not I shall desist in future. The quote below is well up with your usual arrant nonsense.

 

The usual contingent (perhaps only temporarily) are not very happy about the current state of the refreeze

Edited November 22, 2014 by knocker

[Midlands Ice Age]

 

I was just about to post these charts as I thought current weather conditions relevant to this thread. If it's the considered opinion that they are not I shall desist in future. The quote below is well up with your usual arrant nonsense.

 

Knocker,

I would think that the current charts are totally relevent.

As for your comment. I think it is only the second time I have posted on here, so with the comment attached I assume you must be thinking of the usual GW type predictions for the future (dressed up as fact), which normally litter all the blogs on here, which we all have to endure?

MIA

[knocker]

 

 

Knocker,

I would think that the current charts are totally relevent.

As for your comment. I think it is only the second time I have posted on here, so with the comment attached I assume you must be thinking of the usual GW type predictions for the future (dressed up as fact), which normally litter all the blogs on here, which we all have to endure?

MIA

 

Not at all. I merely wondered why you found it necessary to attribute unhappiness to the usual contingent ( I assume that includes me) vis a vis the refreeze. Why on earth should the 'usual contingent' be unhappy about this? And in any case how do you deduce this from the posts. Are you omniscient?

[Gray-Wolf]

"Arctic Sea Ice discussion" ? I'm sure that was the title of the thread I'd posted to??? 

 

As for BAU ??? I'd suggest we all look at the ice over the same time frame ( maybe 1955 to 2014?) to see just what the decadal trend for such a period shows us regarding BAU?

 

What surprises we most is the blind willingness to ignore all that the experts on everything Arctic are telling us about current changes to the climate there ?

 

We have a thread for Arctic data and stats so anything current regarding the state of ice ( extent/area/volume/temps) appears to be well served in that area whereas broader discussions about the changes we see across the Arctic , season to season, appear better suited to this thread?

 

Paul may well have separated discussions in certain areas but I'm certain that all flavour of poster is welcomed in the Arctic thread?

[stewfox]

Links broken stew?

 

 

 

I  have stumbled on a conspiracy me thinks ??

 

-----

Forbidden

 

You don't have permission to access /arctic/meant80n.uk.php on this server.

------

Edited November 22, 2014 by stewfox

[Midlands Ice Age]

 

"Arctic Sea Ice discussion" ? I'm sure that was the title of the thread I'd posted to??? 

 

As for BAU ??? I'd suggest we all look at the ice over the same time frame ( maybe 1955 to 2014?) to see just what the decadal trend for such a period shows us regarding BAU?

 

What surprises we most is the blind willingness to ignore all that the experts on everything Arctic are telling us about current changes to the climate there ?

 

We have a thread for Arctic data and stats so anything current regarding the state of ice ( extent/area/volume/temps) appears to be well served in that area whereas broader discussions about the changes we see across the Arctic , season to season, appear better suited to this thread?

 

Paul may well have separated discussions in certain areas but I'm certain that all flavour of poster is welcomed in the Arctic thread?

 

GW......

Things are turning desperate again.

The last time I looked the title of the thread was 'Arctic Ice Discussion 2014 - 15 THE REFREEZE'..

Not what might happen in 2017 to 2027, or even what happened in the period of time from `1955 to 2014.

No-one on this thread has stated that the sea ice increased during this latter period. It seems to me that everytime someone suggests that the latest 2 weeks (months?) might suggest a change all you guys pull out the same graphs going back to 1900 or 1950 or 1955, when we are supposed to be showing the current data. Thus 2014 -2015 (THE REFREEZE).

As soon as BFTV pulls out a temperature graph going back to 1900 instead of the latest 10-15 year period I have to say I immediately turn off. We all agree that the period 1900 - 2000 showed a warming and yes the period 1979 to 2012 showed a reduction of ice, both effects strongly skewed to the end of the century. but can we PLEASE talk about the current situation?

To me it strikes of desperation in that as soon as a potential change occurs you guys will not tolerate any discussion of the current situation. Is your position that insecure?

MIA

[BornFromTheVoid]

These Arctic sea ice threads have always held discussion on current conditions, analysis on trends, speculation on future trends, etc. It seems more likely that those who are insecure in their position would try to pigeonhole sea ice discussion, but hey, that just my perspective.

 

It's easy to pick small areas of the Arctic and declare how cold it is, but lets see how Arctic temps have been doing so far this month:

 

 

People can draw their own conclusions.

 

 

Finally, complaining because people want to use more than the last few years of data when discussing the changing climate!? Really? That's like whining in an astronomy thread because people are discussing more than just the moon.

[Gray-Wolf]

For a person with the kind of concerns I hold that temp plot is pretty depressing BFTV? When Shakhova got to the region last winter she was met with mere freezing conditions ( and not the normal -7s) and suggested that the corresponding conditions on the sea bed would be several degrees above that. We still await the Odin's reports on what the found over that region this past summer but seeing another year running a repeat cycle unsettles me! 

 

With the Yamal explosions now found to have been gas explosion generated this region needs investigating ( and not dismissing by armchair scientists looking at early noughties data sets!!!).

[keithlucky]

Green shows ice growth which diden"t exist in  2006

Edited November 26, 2014 by keithlucky

[PeteG]

Green shows ice growth which diden"t exist in  2006

That can't be right, it's showing green in Hudson Bay which freezes every year.

[be cause]

That can't be right, it's showing green in Hudson Bay which freezes every year.

.. it is for the time of year .. I was just looking at the same recovery on Cryosphere Today .. both Hudson and Barents have made remarkable recoveries' To see the reversal of nearly 30 years of delaying freezing in the Hudson must be a surprise to many !'And a delight too