Midlands Ice Age

I was wondering where DRL had gone to just the other day... Now I know Welcome (back) , Have missed your insights. MIA

I see there is a weather warning out now from yesterday until sunday. They now expect prolonged rainfall with up to 15mms per hour rates in some places. I was a frequent visitor there in winter for quite a while and I can only remember one had weather like this. Be interesting to hear from you as it gets going. MIA

After falls in Masie sea ice extent of 51K, and today 101K Km2, leaving the ice extent at 14,952K Km2 , it looks as if the days of exceeding 15Mm2 have now ended at 17. It is still the highest for 10 years and the actual ice increase from minimum last sept to the max was amongst the highest. Attached are some graphs for both extent and area from the ASIF to complete this years growth season. I believe that we are now into the northern hemisphere melt season , so I will hopefully be back in September for the 2024/2025 winter growth season. Growth has sure kept us on our toes this year. ... and for Stravaiger.. yes it sure has been a good year and the ice around Svalbard (also now reaching Bear Isle again) has resulted in the Central Arctic basin(CAB) ice extent becoming totally full in the last couple of weeks. MIA

Table above updated to yesterday with the 9th continuous day now over 15.0M. Today's value was 15,108K KM2 despite a 56K KM2 drop in the SOO, since more generally many small increases were recorded in other sea areas. The increase in extent now rivals those of the early teens and exceed those of 2011 and 2009 in the early periods. I have details below of this in a form of a packed chart of Arctic ice extent as shown from the NSIDC, which is being updated by the ASIF - It needs to be expanded to see the detail, and it is recorded for Mar 11th but but clearly indicates the current status. Arctic ice area is still also showing increases - now also later then the normal freeze end date Whilst temperatures above 80 degrees and 66.5 degrees north have now fallen to average for the first time really this year. MIA

This is getting stupid now with another century increase on Masie extent to a new high for the year of 15,178K Km2. This is no less than 14 days since the ASIF called a maximum for the year. It is now called a faux max apparently. We are def seeing something odd at the end of the freeze season. Today's events showed large gains in Bering and Barents Oceans. The updated 15M table follows - MIA

Yet another surprising update.. The last 4 days have seen the sea ice extent on Masie actually increase to over 15M Km2. This mornings NSIDC predict another increase today to possibly yet another new high. The remarkable thing is that - 1) the experts on the ASIF have already called called the end of the extent refreeze season back 2 weeks ago. 2) there seems to be little weather difference to cause these large deviations 3) the temperature of the Arctic DMI (above 80 degrees) is still rising (since Mar1st) and the Northern hemisphere temperatures are still 1 degree above normal. 4) Arctic 'area' is still (steadily?) increasing although normally we should just have started to fall by now - (thanks to the ASIF) and for extent we have - Both 'area' and extent are in the mid teens in terms of the last 18 years, and are now challenging some of the early year dates. All this after an unexpected drop in late February. Why is this happening? Well unless the 'volume' numbers start to increase again I am not certain it is a long term feature change. And my thoughts (for what they are worth?) is that it definitely has some thing to do with the ENSO and the long (3 year?) La Nina pattern set up prior to last summer. It seems as though this pattern still is persisting in the Arctic, even though it has been over-ridden by a large El NIno over the last 9 months for the rest of us. It is also noteworthy that the ENSO forecasts now predict a fall back into neutral of even a further La Nina. The second of my thoughts on the subject are that we have this year seen a 'difference' in the weather patterns across the northern hemisphere with much colder air over 'Asia' , whilst much warmer air (compared to the last 10 years) has been sitting over the N American continent. This has caused the following in terms of ice production - whilst the much smaller Labrador Straits have virtually no ice - The differences are enormous!! Also we have not seen these conditions with large Asian ice conditions for about 10 years. Is this why the sea ice in the last 10 years has been subsiding, since we do seem to have increased more recently, and especially now with this totally unexplained increase? And finally another impact on short term ice (according to day to day satellites) is (I believe) the recently noticed impacts of thin sea ice at the edge of the pack been overridden by the sea. producing incorrectly low ice numbers at times. These, even now. appear to be producing the rapid increases in ice 'accumulations' despite it being beyond the date of refreeze. As we seem to be still increasing in ice for the moment , I will continue to report a little longer into the melt season this year as I feel it is worthwhile that these events are reported somewhere so that these can improve the more long term Arctic forecasting. To show the effects of the increase I will be updating the long-term 15M KM2 table that I started recently in a later review. MIA

Well now we do!!!!! A HUGE (just about unexpected - see above) exceptional increase of (+237K) takes the Masie sea ice extent total to a season's high of 15,114K Km2. Barents was the major driver with a sudden spurt of 90K KM2 . Other areas such as Bering (+48K), SOO (+29k), and Baltic (+22K) suddenly leapt into life again after a dormant 3 or 4 days. One may ask why this has occurred when we are supposedly past the point at which extent has not increased any further, over the last 8 years. It did however increase in many years prior to 2014!! Just perhaps...... ? (look at my 15M charts above). However I looked at the 'mechanism' of the increase in more detail and my main thought is that we have seen the same effect I have identified on 2 or 3 occasions so far this season... - That of sea salty water laying on top of the ice, and this, I believe, confuses the satellite recording data. I believe that the ice has been still there all the time and that it still will then show up again after the water either drains or perhaps the surface refreezes. MIA's theory strikes again.. It will be more interesting to see if it is (as is possible) a straight satellite error in which case it will have a large drop again tomorrow. The temperature (after its reduction after the last few days) has again risen so that really has had no direct impact. (warmer temps have caused more ice on a few occasions!!!) There is still life in the Arctic. The ASIF forum has indicated that this season has seen about a 5% increase in ice growth this year compared to the 2010 era, with the last 3 seasons showing an increase compared to the ongoing trend lines. This trend coincides with the onset of La Nina. Now we are in an El Nino, so lets await the summer melt season with interest. Could well be back again if this totally unusual and surprising freezing season continues on its merry way. MIA

johncam Yep, almost certainly we have passed the largest extent date for this year on the 29th Feb. After the previous high of 15,088K 3 days earlier, we immediately had a large drop of 169K then followed by 3 smaller falls. This reduction took the level down to 14,737K (well below the 'magic' 15M figure I was monitoring). Since then the ice has been increasing slowly on average after an initial steep rise of +189k put us within reach of the magic marker of 15M again. But it failed to cross the boundary. So looking unlikely now that we will create a new maximum (Or even exceed 15M again), but it could well have happened around 10 years previously - when freezing stalled at these levels for about 2 -3 weeks before dropping - so we never know. We are now in the gap between the end of 'extent' increases, but 'area' is likely to continue to increase for the next 6 days. NSIDC 'area' is indeed showing late increases and we now have both area and extent appearing around 10 -12th in the tables for the last 20 years. (Graphs thanks to the ASIF). and for area, and and for extent. Laying snow is still just below average.. It is still not too late that we may see a sudden spurt in all these numbers as colder air has returned to the Arctic environments and northern hemisphere in general as shown both by the DMI (above 80 degrees), and also the ECM climate above 60 degree maps - An early look at the volume map shows that it has slipped into last position in the last few months, this despite much more ice in the eastern part of the globe. - Definitely caused by the slow ice season in the western sea areas. Nearly at the end of the ' growth ' season now, so my reports will slowly be dwindling... MIA

Wow I had been watching the temps in Antarctica from afar after I had noticed the very rapid loss of sea ice from the area during the latter part of 2022, and first three quarters of 2023. I had observed the rapid recovery since then, and that was interesting to me.. But i hadn't realised exactly how cold it had become in the latest 3 months period.. It is certainly looking more likely as though the previous very warm 15 months were at least in part associated with the Hunga Tonga eruption. MIA

It is impressive, but 2 things need to be taken into account - 1) What has happened to the number of flights during this period.? 2) Can it be related/compared to a genuine met station say a further 20 miles west of the suburbs? MIA

Exactly how will that help us? As a result of our forthcoming discussions on the rises of the sea level, I have been reading the IPCC Rel 6 document and they have a section on exactly what they think the sea level rises will mean for different areas of the world. They state that various methods of amelioration and 'concrete' will be required based upon the following review of the impacts of the sea rises between the best and worst of their RCP analyses. The following is from their political summary, but it does represent the technical specifications. Quote - (Something does not seem to allow me to bring the graphs and tables on here directly but the screenshots below gives the detail and can be zoomed), But it concludes with the following - Figure SPM.4 (above) The effect of regional sea level rise on extreme sea level events at coastal locations. (a) Schematic illustration of extreme sea level events and their average recurrence in the recent past (1986–2005) and the future. As a consequence of mean sea level rise, local sea levels that historically occurred once per century […] Figure SPM.4 | The effect of regional sea level rise on extreme sea level events at coastal locations. (a) Schematic illustration of extreme sea level events and their average recurrence in the recent past (1986–2005) and the future. As a consequence of mean sea level rise, local sea levels that historically occurred once per century (historical centennial events, HCEs) are projected to recur more frequently in the future. (b) The year in which HCEs are expected to recur once per year on average under RCP8.5 and RCP2.6, at the 439 individual coastal locations where the observational record is sufficient. The absence of a circle indicates an inability to perform an assessment due to a lack of data but does not indicate absence of exposure and risk. The darker the circle, the earlier this transition is expected. The likely range is ±10 years for locations where this transition is expected before 2100. White circles (33% of locations under RCP2.6 and 10% under RCP8.5) indicate that HCEs are not expected to recur once per year before 2100. (c) An indication at which locations this transition of HCEs to annual events is projected to occur more than 10 years later under RCP2.6 compared to RCP8.5. As the scenarios lead to small differences by 2050 in many locations results are not shown here for RCP4.5 but they are available in Chapter 4. {4.2.3, Figure 4.10, Figure 4.12} End quote.. The Chinese coastline is relatively untouched by RCP 2.6 according to the above chart. They then go on to describe in more detail the various interventions they would expect to be put into place. - (Irrespective of what scenario we end up in). Quote One document 4 screenshots I'm afraid, but I've overlapped them.. Followed by the following more detailed review of their investigations. Figure SPM.5 (above)| Sea level rise risks and responses. The term response is used here instead of adaptation because some responses, such as retreat, may or may not be considered to be adaptation. (a) shows the combined risk of coastal flooding, erosion and salinization for illustrative geographies in 2100, due to changing mean and extreme sea levels under RCP2.6 and RCP8.5 and under two response scenarios. Risks under RCPs 4.5 and 6.0 were not assessed due to a lack of literature for the assessed geographies. The assessment does not account for changes in extreme sea level beyond those directly induced by mean sea level rise; risk levels could increase if other changes in extreme sea levels were considered (e.g., due to changes in cyclone intensity). Panel a) considers a socioeconomic scenario with relatively stable coastal population density over the century. {SM4.3.2} Risks to illustrative geographies have been assessed based on relative sea level changes projected for a set of specific examples: New York City, Shanghai and Rotterdam for resource-rich coastal cities covering a wide range of response experiences; South Tarawa, Fongafale and Male’ for urban atoll islands; Mekong and Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna for large tropical agricultural deltas; and Bykovskiy, Shishmaref, Kivalina, Tuktoyaktuk and Shingle Point for Arctic communities located in regions remote from rapid glacio-isostatic adjustment. {4.2, 4.3.4, SM4.2} The assessment distinguishes between two contrasting response scenarios. “No-to-moderate response” describes efforts as of today (i.e., no further significant action or new types of actions). “Maximum potential response” represents a combination of responses implemented to their full extent and thus significant additional efforts compared to today, assuming minimal financial, social and political barriers. The assessment has been conducted for each sea level rise and response scenario, as indicated by the burning embers in the figure; in-between risk levels are interpolated. {4.3.3} The assessment criteria include exposure and vulnerability (density of assets, level of degradation of terrestrial and marine buffer ecosystems), coastal hazards (flooding, shoreline erosion, salinization), in-situ responses (hard engineered coastal defenses, ecosystem restoration or creation of new natural buffers areas, and subsidence management) and planned relocation. Planned relocation refers to managed retreat or resettlement as described in Chapter 4, i.e., proactive and local-scale measures to reduce risk by relocating people, assets and infrastructure. Forced displacement is not considered in this assessment. Panel a) also highlights the relative contributions of in-situ responses and planned relocation to the total risk reduction. (b) schematically illustrates the risk reduction (vertical arrows) and risk delay (horizontal arrows) through mitigation and/or responses to sea level rise. (c) summarizes and assesses responses to sea level rise in terms of their effectiveness, costs, co-benefits, drawbacks, economic efficiency and associated governance challenges. {4.4.2} (d) presents generic steps of an adaptive decision-making approach, as well as key enabling conditions for responses to sea level rise. {4.4.4, 4.4.5} End quote My comments follow - They however dismiss the option of a mass migration of towns and settlements which could be used by most populated coastal areas of the UK, via the building of new towns in safe areas and moving the people into them as a part of an ongoing strategy of improving people's lives in exactly the same way as we have built new towns over the last 50 years. A 1 Meter change in sea level by 2100 would be easily controlled in the UK, whilst we evaluate exactly which path we need to take for more drastic measures (If any?). I really do feel that we must take a note of what the Dutch are proposing to do, and if we start in the next 5 years, will see many of people's fears of CC subside. (Unless that is an integral part of the strategy, of course!). It can be produced as a strategy to enable a 'more sociable modernised society' and thus would not be all counted as costs against sea level mitigation. I feel that a little less stressful thinking together with controlling any over-reactions will go a long way towards successfully handling the crisis. --- We cannot just assume that the Chinese will come on board, and it is clear to me that we cannot go on with just using our current strategies, which to me just seem to be to stop CO2 at all costs - It looks like failure to me. MIA

The most 'revealing' of all graphs on here!! How can we actually effect the worlds' climate!! China will never copy us - absolutely no chance. I guess it has to be amelioration and methods of flood reduction, whilst keeping going with the current path.. MIA

Could you send a link for the above paper please? MIA

Thanks John I too have not seen anything documented. But presumably someone must have modelled the various parameters. Otherwise how do we come up with any dates for this the most critical element of CC? I guess I will have to look through the IPCC Climate change document!!. I was hoping that one of the experts on here would have known the answer. I do so much hope that it has not been 'parameterised'. MIA

WYW.. Regarding your suggested most important impact of CC being that of sea levels. How much of the sea level rise is due to the melting of Greenland (and afterwards presumably Antarctic)., as well as that adding due to the continued increased temperature of the oceans?. Also, I have always assumed that the melting of the Arctic oceans sea ice will have little effect upon the sea levels (due to S.G.), yet I have noticed one or 2 people mentioning the melting of the Arctic as being a factor in the other thread. Afterall it melts out almost totally in most years even now. Do we see annual change of sea ice affecting the sea levels during the course of the year today? MIA

7.2C and 89mms please...... MIA

Almost a week since my last update, and since we are now 95% thru to the expected maximum date, thought that an update with some data might be useful. Snow levels have not changed much and the snow extent (as opposed to what has fallen) is still below average. No real changes are currently forecast. Sea ice extent has risen to above 15,000K Km2 again and is now at 6days above for this year. (for comparison of past, see annual data below). Change over the last 6 days have shown (-67K), (-26K) - (below 15M) - and then (+156K) and (-32K, (-33K) and finally (-3k). These changes have occured due to still larger increases in the SOO, and when Barents and Baffin Bay increased we had the very large total increase. There is now about 7 days to the expected maximum in extent. Area will follow shortly afterwards, and volume will peak at the end of March - due to continued bottom freezing. However I thought it may be interesting over the next few weeks to see how the extent varies with respect to the last 17 years, by examining the number of days that the ice stays above 15.000K Km2. Year First date past 15M Maximum Number of days over 15M 2024 042 15072K 6 (so far) 2023 064 15005 1 2022 059 15065 4 2021 2020 061 15129 6 2019 2018 2017 2016 057 15077 5 2015 2014 051 15298 35 2013 041 15550 56 2012 047 15296 55 2011 066 15081 6 2010 049 15298 42 2009 048 15326 10 2008 057 15651 68 Could be interesting to see in a few weeks time. Temperature in the Artic circle has been slowly dropping over the last 32weeks but is still above the olden days of last century. Another update nearer the expected maximum, early next week., when the February monthly averages will be available. MIA

danthetan Cannot really help... If it is on the SST map it could be the water temp below zero. Remember that salty water doesn't freeze until -2C is reached not zero. MIA

Have you got a link for me to check as TT is not one of my sources? MIA

Thanks for this thread WYW.. Can I ask my Arctic/ Antarctic based questions in here and If so would I then be classed as a denier.? I always try to use the data to lead me to conclusions, but that may not necessarily agree with certain people in here, who think GW is the key to every facet of the weather. If you think I may be too contentious then I will happily stay away. MIA

Snow continues to be just below average according to Rutgers - The maps still show excess snow cover in China and central Asia, but less in Europe and North America. Interestingly this seems not to have not been caused by the snow that has fallen - Onto sea ice in the northern hemisphere - Masie sea ice extent has had a rocky week since the last update with falls of -70K km2, -173K, -143K, -21k, km2 (mostly in Barents), but then with gains of +23K Km2, +253K, +76K and today +74K Km2 to move the extent back to 15,019K KM2, after dropping to 14,593K KM2 5 days ago. This leaves us top of the ice pile again on Masie. Will it go on to register new 10 year highs in the next (last) remaining 2.5 weeks of the freezing season? (around day67?). It seems as though the ice extent has been responsive to the Barents low pressure systems. This has been corroborated by Jaxa (thanks to the ASIF), which dropped to no 10 in the list, but has also recovered back to no 18 (back to 2005'ish) again now - This is in direct contrast to the 'area' graphs ( 5 day average) which show a week of steady gains ! So we are now closing in on the maximum for the year which from my previous data can occur around day 66. (6th March?).Will this year beat the last few years now?, it looks as if the records for the last 20 years have gone out of reach. But this year has been one of surprises... MIA

Hi there again... Yes Barents has been up and down more times than.... It has since recovered again just as quickly.. Which sort of corroborates my theory about this.. That.. these depressions seem to break up the ice initially on the shelf edge, (or possibly (more probably I think) at least allow seawater to ride up over the ice) , and as soon as the swells have subsided then the water drains away and allows the ice to appear for the satellite to 'resee' the ice extent. There could also be genuine refreeze. This does not mean that the sats are incorrect it more probably means that the lower limit of 15% (or 25% for some datasets to register the area with ice) is past and thus it suddenly registers with no ice. It seems as though the sea ice 'area' datasets are not this volatile (they actually count the actual number of ice pixels, and although they will be distorted to some extent will probably be more representative). This again backs up the theory that sea ice extent reacts to any surface water on top of the ice. (partic the ice pools which start to form during the melt season) I will be back later with a more thorough weekly review.

Thanks WYW, I think we have come to a certain degree of agreement. I too think that there is a natural impact (PDO or something similar ?) now showing in the arctic sea ice data. Are you aware that the NSIDC also produce a dataset containing all the individual areas extent data going back to 1979? Also be aware that there is a difference of about 15% in the total extent figures for any one day (on average), with NSIDC always below other datasets. If you analysed the Jaxa data at the 'total' level I am certain that you will get a more meaningful diagnosis as to what is going on, and also will show up more of some of the minor trends - The data in Jaxa for the outer areas is so much more accurate. Also for Matty.... The Great Lakes are not counted as a part of the sea ice extent data - presumably because it is not salt water. It is however true that I mentioned it in last years reports!!! MIA