How exceptional is this year within the UK?

[Stratos Ferric]

http://www.sheffieldweather.co.uk/janmon05.pdf

A few in there.

http://www.sheffieldweather.co.uk/febmon05.pdf

a few more including one unforecast one that never happened.

http://www.sheffieldweather.co.uk/feb2002wiz.htm

a few in there. So yes we still get a few blows. This year we missed them in Sheffield so far.

I wouldn't so keen to count cold months as outliers. If you do you've also got to include very warm months as outliers as well.

AFF raised this last night. I pointed out my logic for calling them outliers. July was a warm outlier in absolute terms, but using the frame of reference I used for my assessment it IS March that is the oddity. Warm months (and very warm months) are far more the norm this year (and generally inrecent years) than cold ones.

[ribster]

I thought the guy on question time this week was very brave. When he suggested that the scientific community is still very much divided on the causes of global warming (uk global warming taxes were being discussed), the audience jeered and laughed at him. Fair play to him for standing up and having the balls to speak the truth, however untrendy that may be at the moment.

[Stratos Ferric]

I thought the guy on question time this week was very brave. When he suggested that the scientific community is still very much divided on the causes of global warming (uk global warming taxes were being discussed), the audience jeered and laughed at him. Fair play to him for standing up and having the balls to speak the truth, however untrendy that may be at the moment.

Though not the subject of this thread, regarding cause, so far as I can make out, the scientific community now accepts the global climate is warming; the only division is not whether man is contributing, but to what extent he is. Like I said, ause is not the subject of this thread though, nor is warming per sé.

[The PIT]

I understand the sceptism as Scientist now are seen to be a lot of bickering academics vying for the next grant for their projects. My own viewpoint is theres a lot of natural warming with a bit of man made warming added in. However it's a very good idea if we clean our act up anyway as it would benifit us all anyway.

[Andy Bown]

Not had time to read everyone's long posts but just off the top of my head this has been an exceltional year for me because...

1. I recorded my highest temperature on July 19th at 36c.

2. There were two ice days in February, the first I'd recorded.

3. October was the wettest month I've recorded.

[Dawlish]

Not had time to read everyone's long posts but just off the top of my head this has been an exceltional year for me because...

1. I recorded my highest temperature on July 19th at 36c.

2. There were two ice days in February, the first I'd recorded.

3. October was the wettest month I've recorded.

And really, in recording the weather, that's what its all about! Nice slant on "exceptional" Andy.

Paul

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

I understand the sceptism as Scientist now are seen to be a lot of bickering academics vying for the next grant for their projects. My own viewpoint is theres a lot of natural warming with a bit of man made warming added in. However it's a very good idea if we clean our act up anyway as it would benifit us all anyway.

I agree - what appears to us as "exceptional" is natural warm cycle.

0.5C is not in itself exceptional.

Given the exceptional SSTs (+2-3C) I consider the rate of ice rebound in the Arctic region as exceptional as the UK summer and autumn.

]the only division is not whether man is contributing, but to what extent he is.

That is the key question. Maybe there are a bunch of climate scientists who deny the physics of the "greenhouse effect" but I think they are in the minority of those who question whether human global warming is a) bad thing or big contributor. Though I like snow it is probably neither.

[The PIT]

Not had time to read everyone's long posts but just off the top of my head this has been an exceltional year for me because...

1. I recorded my highest temperature on July 19th at 36c.

2. There were two ice days in February, the first I'd recorded.

3. October was the wettest month I've recorded.

. Two ice days v Highest temp plus wettest month ever recorded. Therefore it's cooler and wetter. No I'm not serious.

[Stratos Ferric]

I agree - what appears to us as "exceptional" is natural warm cycle.

0.5C is not in itself exceptional.

Given the exceptional SSTs (+2-3C) I consider the rate of ice rebound in the Arctic region as exceptional as the UK summer and autumn.

That is the key question. Maybe there are a bunch of climate scientists who deny the physics of the "greenhouse effect" but I think they are in the minority of those who question whether human global warming is a) bad thing or big contributor. Though I like snow it is probably neither.

Make your mind up AFF. If the current warming is natural (your first paragraph) then how can humans be contributing to the warming? Or are you suggesting that not all of the current warming is man-induced?

You do seem apt to bandy phrases and judgements around without actually checking facts or producing an argument. Whether or not 0.5C is exceptional depends on what has gone before. Whether or not it matters depends on whether you accept the AGW thesis or not.

You aren't a US citizen by any chance are you?

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

Make your mind up AFF. If the current warming is natural (your first paragraph) then how can humans be contributing to the warming?

Arrange six billion people in just the right formation you've got the world's biggest radiator at a pleasant 37C.

Yes, I do believe humans warm the planet - by their very breathing in and out it is they clearly do.

Greenhouse gasses of human origin also contribute. They warm on a scale that is many magnitude larger than the world's largest circus act.

How much heating greenhouse gasses are responsible for depends on larger climate drivers.

Does anyone know?

I'm prepared to accept Greenhouse gasses have warmed the Earth by far more than 0.5C. I'm equally prepared to accept contribution of GHG to the warming is 0.05C.

The point is humans are not in control of the climate and that history has shown time and again in an uncertain environment adaptation is preferable to management.

GW taxes is stupidity.

Or are you suggesting that not all of the current warming is man-induced?

Yes. I did. I recognise no climate scientist of any stripe would necessarily deny this, either. As I said, I'm prepared to accept the GHG warming is far greater (or less) than that which has been observed (and questions remain about the observations).

You do seem apt to bandy phrases and judgements around without actually checking facts or producing an argument. Whether or not 0.5C is exceptional depends on what has gone before. Whether or not it matters depends on whether you accept the AGW thesis or not.

You aren't a US citizen by any chance are you?

No.

Runaway Global Warming has the hallmarks of an Armagedden thought contagion. It's powerful because it's got all the ingredients to be talked about a lot - at least in some parts of the world. RGW theory is a self-perpetuating discourse fueled by fear (enviro-catastrophe), envy (US), greed (taxes) and the idea man is the absolute master of his universe (power over nature).

When I see science I respect it and keep my trap shut. RGW is ideology, not science.

PS: Isn't the ice rebound this year amazing? Judging by the "exceptional" UK CET (the one that makes March an "outlier") you might expect the Arctic to be far behind in ice area compared to previous years given all the heat in Europe and the very high SSTs in the North Atlantic. In fact, Arctic Ice development is ahead in some regions and overall seems to have shrugged off the "record breaking summer" and over-powered high SSTs to record average levels already.

Edited November 5, 2006 by AtlanticFlamethrower

[Roger J Smith]

I vote for quite exceptional. Having three months (out of four consecutive) either warmest in two cases, or third warmest, in such a long period of record (made more relevant by the fact that one record was previously set in 1729), makes 2006 sure to be remembered as a famous "warm year" in the future, unless of course, this is the start of a greater climate shift and these records are soon to be broken again.

If this is largely a natural cycle of warming, then surely 2006 will represent the peak of it, and then it might be a long while until the two new records are broken.

Another thing that I found rather remarkable was the long period of time, from about 24 March to 30 October, without many days below normal. I think there were a few in early April, late May, and during that brief cool spell in July, whereas August just seemed to stay right on normal. But it seemed to me that above normal temperatures were occurring 80% of the time in that long stretch, and perhaps by the end of the year one could extend that to a future date as well, as the past few days were just a little below normal.

[Stratos Ferric]

...

PS: Isn't the ice rebound this year amazing? Judging by the "exceptional" UK CET (the one that makes March an "outlier") you might expect the Arctic to be far behind in ice area compared to previous years given all the heat in Europe and the very high SSTs in the North Atlantic. In fact, Arctic Ice development is ahead in some regions and overall seems to have shrugged off the "record breaking summer" and over-powered high SSTs to record average levels already.

I don't disagree with much of the above re GW, though such discussions were not intended to be part of the thread. There is ample space elsewhere on N-W for those discussions.

Quite why you draw a relationship between the UK CET and Arctic sea ice is beyond me. You might as well draw comparisons with rains in Bangladesh, temperatures in the USA, or storms in Japan. If the UK was cooling down remarkably then you might have a point. If there is a connection then presumably it is symbiotic and we should expect a cold winter?

Arctic sea ice this summer, so far as I recall, retreated about as far as it did last year. It is currently, in its extent, also about where it should be at this time. What's remarkable about that?

What I have noted is that SSTs off the ice shelf are below normal. This might just signify a lot of summer meltwater run-off pooled at the surface - fresh water being less dense than salt water. Fresh water is also easier to freeze. It is therefore entirely plausible that any boundary freezing at present is actually because of, and not despite, warmer arctic temperatures.

Edited November 5, 2006 by Stratos Ferric

[Stratos Ferric]

...Another thing that I found rather remarkable was the long period of time, from about 24 March to 30 October, without many days below normal. I think there were a few in early April, late May, and during that brief cool spell in July, whereas August just seemed to stay right on normal. But it seemed to me that above normal temperatures were occurring 80% of the time in that long stretch, and perhaps by the end of the year one could extend that to a future date as well, as the past few days were just a little below normal.

An excellent point; at the micro scale the atmospheric behaviour is clearly consistent with what we're getting at the macro scale. This has been true for a number of years. Repeated reference to the Hadley plots has shown several occasions when UK CET has breached the 95th percentile on the warm side, and even set new date records, whilst it never breaches the record downside nowadays, and seldom comes anywhere near the 95th percentile.

I'd be surprised if 2006 marked the peak of warming. I may start another thread later that is winter specific because there is a limit (fornow) to how much warmer winter can get; summer is a different matter.

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

What I have noted is that SSTs off the ice shelf are below normal. This might just signify a lot of summer meltwater run-off pooled at the surface - fresh water being less dense than salt water. Fresh water is also easier to freeze. It is therefore entirely plausible that any boundary freezing at present is actually because of, and not despite, warmer arctic temperatures.

Umm, no.

You have not accounted for the amount of frozen water. You have accounted for the rate that water has refrozen, no? Since that extra freshwater you claim exists presupposed the extra warming that melted it that warming must further result in reduced cold air and higher SSTs that balance out the ice-gain from diluted sea water and prevent increase in ice.

To get more ice you need more cold.

More importantly there is now ice where there were high SSTAs in SEPT/OCT - between +5C - +2C above normal. (See charts.). These higher than normal SSTs more than offset the marginally higher temperature at which diluted sea water would freeze. (Sea water of 35 parts per thousand freezes at -2C. Freshwater freezes 0C. Sea water at 17 ppt freezes at -1C. )

Considering the rate at which sea freezes in Autumn will depend more on the sea temperature than the air temperature (when sea modifies air temperature more than air-sea) it is truly remarkable how much ice has formed where it has formed if we are on a warming trend. And that the Arctic is at a normal level of coverage. Anyway, where specifically are you claiming the cold freshwater is pooled? You claim these freshwater pools exist so they must show up clearly on SSTA charts as a cold anomaly against the background of high SSTAs. The big ice-plus anomalies went from warm anomaly - ice with no cold pool in between.

Edited November 5, 2006 by AtlanticFlamethrower

[Snowly does it]

Its an exceptionally exceptional year, the last 6 months have been quite astonishing.

What would cap it, for me, as a total fruit loop of a year, is a cold outturn for November and December bringing us in below the last 4 years. With a record heat for much of the year, THAT would be mind-blowing imo.

[Stratos Ferric]

Umm, no.

You have not accounted for the amount of frozen water. You have accounted for the rate that water has refrozen, no? Since that extra freshwater you claim exists presupposed the extra warming that melted it that warming must further result in reduced cold air and higher SSTs that balance out the ice-gain from diluted sea water and prevent increase in ice.

To get more ice you need more cold.

More importantly there is now ice where there were high SSTAs in SEPT/OCT - between +5C - +2C above normal. (See charts.). These higher than normal SSTs more than offset the marginally higher temperature at which diluted sea water would freeze. (Sea water of 35 parts per thousand freezes at -2C. Freshwater freezes 0C. Sea water at 17 ppt freezes at -1C. )

Considering the rate at which sea freezes in Autumn will depend more on the sea temperature than the air temperature (when sea modifies air temperature more than air-sea) it is truly remarkable how much ice has formed where it has formed if we are on a warming trend. And that the Arctic is at a normal level of coverage. Anyway, where specifically are you claiming the cold freshwater is pooled? You claim these freshwater pools exist so they must show up clearly on SSTA charts as a cold anomaly against the background of high SSTAs. The big ice-plus anomalies went from warm anomaly - ice with no cold pool in between.

AAF,

I'm not going to come back after this, because it's off thread, and in any case the point that you're trying to make seems fatuous and groundless.

Your first para is not entirely coherent, but I'll try to answer what I think is the "ah but" point you're trying to make - but failing. ALL of the ice coverage sites I look at show AREA - certanily cryosphere now, which most people on here make use of I think. AREA, i.e. surface viewed from above. A warm summer melts ice from above, it is perfectly possible to lose a greater proportion of mass than it is area, and as an aside there have been several reports recently of polar ice thinning alarmingly. The extra melting would have come largely from the top of the ice mass, not the margins. This would, as you state, dilute salt water at the margins.

Ice freeze depends much more on air temp than it does sea teamp. FACT - if the air isn't freezing the sea cannot freeze. The thermal capacity of water is much greater than that of air, but energy fluxes very eficiently at the boundary and even very warm water can freeze quickly at the surface so long as it isn't getting mixed. Rapid refreeze (such as you claim it is even though the official charts suggest differently) might just reflect an unusually calm ocean surface. Once the sun gets low /on / below the horizon there is no news in freezing temps at the arctic. I honestly think you're seeing something that really isn't there.

As I said, I am not at all aware that the refreeze IS remarkable actually; you'd better produce some evidence to back that up if you will. The attached chart, from cryo-now, suggests that overall we are currenty EXACTLY where we were this time last year. Quite what is remarkable about that when the arctic has had another warm summer I don't know. Necromancer that you are you're seeing something that I'm not.

Greenland and Baffin are below where they were at this time last year, broadly speaking the waters off Russia are slightly ahead. Go look at the latest SST charts and, surprise surprise, the cold water is off Russia. Interestingly the E side of Greenland also has a tongue of very cold water; in prviousl years I've put this down to the presence of open (though cold) water, where previously there was ice, but I might be wrong on that.

In summary, I cannot see what you're getting excited about; my assessment of the facts is different to yours, and until you actually produce some data - PREFERABLY IN ANOTHER THREAD e.g. "Remarkable Ice rebound?" - I cannot help you clairfiy your understanding.

Its an exceptionally exceptional year, the last 6 months have been quite astonishing.

What would cap it, for me, as a total fruit loop of a year, is a cold outturn for November and December bringing us in below the last 4 years. With a record heat for much of the year, THAT would be mind-blowing imo.

SM,

lol...that reminds me of the partizan commentator on Radio Leeds, suggesting to Norman Hunter a few years ago with Leeds 3-0 down to someone or other and about two minutes to play that "that last goal is going to make it harder for us to get anything out of this one Norman". I'm sure he must have watched replays of goals scored against "us" over and over again in the hope that sooner or later the scorere wouuld actually miss.

The outcome would be mind blowing but it isn't going to happen.

[Snowly does it]

SM,

lol...that reminds me of the partizan commentator on Radio Leeds, suggesting to Norman Hunter a few years ago with Leeds 3-0 down to someone or other and about two minutes to play that "that last goal is going to make it harder for us to get anything out of this one Norman". I'm sure he must have watched replays of goals scored against "us" over and over again in the hope that sooner or later the scorere wouuld actually miss.

The outcome would be mind blowing but it isn't going to happen.

I didn't say it would SF, but it would be the full house for me if it did (and I'd replace 'isn't' with 'is highly unlikely to'). A remarkable year nonetheless!

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

Go look at the latest SST charts and, surprise surprise, the cold water is off Russia.

It's off Norway where there is no ice.

(East Greenland waters have a + anomaly and had a Greenland high in October pumping warm air that side which might explain why it hasn't frozen as last year and has held back the overall NH charts).

This IS relevant to this thread as I find Arctic ice rebound and new growth "exceptional" considering in the UK we had such a hot summer and mild Autumn.

UK is such a tiny part of the world I don't see the point of this thread if you're not going to look at UK climate in global context. Presumably by calling March an "outlier" that is what you are already doing.

Edited November 5, 2006 by AtlanticFlamethrower

[Stratos Ferric]

It's off Norway where there is no ice.

(East Greenland waters have a + anomaly and had a Greenland high in October pumping warm air that side which might explain why it hasn't frozen as last year and has held back the overall NH charts).

This IS relevant to this thread as I find Arctic ice rebound and new growth "exceptional" considering in the UK we had such a hot summer and mild Autumn.

UK is such a tiny part of the world I don't see the point of this thread if you're not going to look at UK climate in global context. Presumably by calling March an "outlier" that is what you are already doing.

AFF, like I said, it's irrelevant. Sea ice in the Arctic is entirely unrelated to the weather in the UK, in any case, as I also said, the "rebound" is hardly exceptional - the way you're banging on anyone would think the ice was reaching Iceland. The low point this summer was where it was last year. As I showed previously, the hemispheric ice is absolutely where it was this time last year in total area. I.e. it's gone from normal, to, er, normal. If you want to discuss the minutae of sea ice why not do so in Carinthian's excellent sea ice thread...and like I said, the quality of your argument would improve dramatically if you could find a way to back up your wilder assertions with evidence. SSTs around the UK, fine, I can see some relevance, but sea ice 2000 miles away, where, please, is the link?

There is NO cold water at present off Norway. As the attached plot shows, and PRECISELY as I pointed out earlier, the cold water is either off the E margin of Greenland, or off N Russia. To help you, as you seem to be experiencing geographic confusion, I have pointed out the two areas we're discussing. Note BLUE (cold) off Greenland, and GREEN (warm) off Norway. I also include the latest 7 day temp anomalies; Greenland remains very warm - as it has all summer, hence the melt hypothesis (though we're now into winter so what we'd be seeing is the result of summer); the only cold is around northern Russian fringes, where sea ice is indeed slightly ahead of where it was last year.

Edited November 5, 2006 by Stratos Ferric

[osmposm]

What I have noted is that SSTs off the ice shelf are below normal. This might just signify a lot of summer meltwater run-off pooled at the surface - fresh water being less dense than salt water. Fresh water is also easier to freeze. It is therefore entirely plausible that any boundary freezing at present is actually because of, and not despite, warmer arctic temperatures.

There is also that strange phenomenon, Stratos (and sorry - I, too, would prefer this to be in a separate thread), that in a domestic freezer at least, warm water is supposed to freeze quicker than cold. I won't go into the mass of arguments about why, and indeed if this really happens. Here's a reasonably simple summary of the effect, though you can find loads more on the net: http://www.bbc.co.uk/gloucestershire/weath...03/12/ice.shtml

In any case, I agree with you about the lack of anything exceptional in the ice levels overall. It's exactly average, as it was this time last year, despite both levels following on very warm Sept/Octobers.

[Stratos Ferric]

There is also that strange phenomenon, Stratos (and sorry - I, too, would prefer this to be in a separate thread), that in a domestic freezer at least, warm water is supposed to freeze quicker than cold. I won't go into the mass of arguments about why, and indeed if this really happens. Here's a reasonably simple summary of the effect, though you can find loads more on the net: http://www.bbc.co.uk/gloucestershire/weath...03/12/ice.shtml

In any case, I agree with you about the lack of anything exceptional in the ice levels overall. It's exactly average, as it was this time last year, despite both levels following on very warm Sept/Octobers.

Good point, and Ihadn't thought about that. I was astonished when I first saw that cited on, of all places, Slowwatch; but having checked the internet at the time it is indeed a fact; I think it's to do with the flux rates, and somehow the development of momentum in flux; hot-cold fluxes faster than nearly cold-cold,and as you say, rather remarkably, actually manages to overtake it.

Edited November 5, 2006 by Stratos Ferric

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

I know where Greenland is. I know where Norway is.

Sea ice in the Arctic is entirely unrelated to the weather in the UK

Yet higher temperatures in UK are related to the world's weather - so much that cold March is an "outlier" in what was otherwise for you a year of "exceptional" warming in UK?

And you're wrong, again.

The cold anomaly that you attributed to fresh meltwater was produced by cold atmospheric temperatures.

16 September high SSTs in Kara Sea with cold anomaly near Norway/Finland/Russia (- note Ice has yet to form in this area of cold SSTs). 14 October - Kara Sea cooled to +2C. By 24 October we have a cold anomaly. Was this cold anomaly produced by run-off freshwater as theorised? Let's take a look at the 850hpa charts that cover that time. HERE, HERE and HERE.

Do strange physics you're teaching me that means warming results in more ice cover stretch to water melting in sub-zero temperatures as shown? The cold anomaly that turned +2-4C anomaly into a cold anomaly and froze the Kara Sea seemed to be produced by COLD atmospheric temperatures not freshwater melt.

PS: Here is the latest SSTA chart from NOAA.

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

OFF TOPIC -

Good point, and Ihadn't thought about that. I was astonished when I first saw that cited on, of all places, Slowwatch; but having checked the internet at the time it is indeed a fact; I think it's to do with the flux rates, and somehow the development of momentum in flux; hot-cold fluxes faster than nearly cold-cold,and as you say, rather remarkably, actually manages to overtake it.

Needlesstosay, the explanation for the Mpemba Effect doesn't carry over outside laboratory. For one, in laboratory faster cooling is achieved by the water container's effect on the surrounding air and frost. Second, warm sea water is more dense, with salt, not less dense.

In hot water the molecules are more active and further apart. So long as the temperature of the freezer remains constant the cold will find it easier to penetrate into the liquid - and once it's there, so long as the temperature remains constant (fed by electricity) - there will be faster cooling.

That's my theory, anyway. Actually, I don't know what my answer suggests re: real world conditins. Who knows.

Edited November 5, 2006 by AtlanticFlamethrower

[Stu_London]

Haven't read all the long scientific (and non scientific) posts on here, but I would say that it's an exceptional year in the the context of say the last 100 years - however in the context of the last 15, it's not.

A lot has been made of the CET, however the headlines have been caused by warm and mild spells coinciding with the calender months as much as the weather itself.

[West is Best]

Haven't read all the long scientific (and non scientific) posts on here, but I would say that it's an exceptional year in the the context of say the last 100 years - however in the context of the last 15, it's not.

A lot has been made of the CET, however the headlines have been caused by warm and mild spells coinciding with the calender months as much as the weather itself.

Stu ... I'm not sure I follow the logic of that in terms of the actual facts. If the last 6 months beat any previous 6 month period by nearly 0.6C (an astonishing amount) then that has transcended calendar month quirks. A whole load of records fell within that as well of course. We will wait and see if the year comes in as one of the warmest on record, but at least half of this year is entirely without parallel.