Polar Ice sets new minimum

[Gray-Wolf]

So.... Have we hit minimum yet?

Been flatlining for a while hasn't it? I think it would take something special on the Russian side of things over the next week to improve (if that is the correct word in these circumstances!) on what we have currently.

Heck of a drop in total ice for one year eh? I can't bare the "where next" answers......there's no way , I feel, that we'll see this next year and so the rampers will have us in a 'cool down'....gah!!!!

[Admiral_Bobski]

Thanks for that, Chris - that's a very interesting paper you've unearthed there. Do you know if this is this the most recent paper discussing such influences? 22 years can be a long time in scientific circles, and if nobody else has studied these effects since then I'd imagine it was high time that a new study was conducted, taking advantage of the improvements in technology.

CB

[Chris Knight]

Thanks for that, Chris - that's a very interesting paper you've unearthed there. Do you know if this is this the most recent paper discussing such influences? 22 years can be a long time in scientific circles, and if nobody else has studied these effects since then I'd imagine it was high time that a new study was conducted, taking advantage of the improvements in technology.

CB

I think it may have been the only one that factored in the solar activity. They state that there was a 1983 paper by Borisenkov, which looked for Milankovich-like cycles of short periodicity due to influences within the solar system, but considering the sun to be constant in output. That work attempted to look further into the past as well as into the 21st century, however I can only access the abstract online, which is not so informative.

The best way to look for any more recent work is to search for papers that cite this reference. However, the recent trend has been to research human influence on climate, and this is what governments etc. give grants for - not for "natural" sources of climate change. Still it might be interesting to email the authors to see if they could give an update on their analysis program with some more recent data.

Of course, it might have been running in FORTRAN on a UNIX mainframe or possibly I guess they could have been using an IBM PC 286 with perhaps 10 Mb Winchester and a 5 1/4 floppy, maybe with a 1Mb memory upgrade from the supplied 640Kb! All £5.5k worth. Yes, 22y is a long time in climate change direction and methods.

[Calrissian]

4.13 is the official 'low'...

see: http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7006640.stm

--

So, 4.13, very impressive reduction, and by such a massive margin against the previous record, that even an ardent anti-climate change naysayer might even notice.

Calrissian: 2019: 0.0

[Bobby]

4.13 is the official 'low'...

see: http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7006640.stm

--

So, 4.13, very impressive reduction, and by such a massive margin against the previous record, that even an ardent anti-climate change naysayer might even notice.

Calrissian: 2019: 0.0

There's always WIB.

[saint]

i am confused?

saint

[Gray-Wolf]

Here's an image from this A.M. of the area of coast between 60 and 90 East showing the coast out to the open ocean.

Now I don't know what was meant by Mr Gubine's 'slow melt' from the coast out nor his 'Swiss cheese' style melt of the pack when I view this.

To me it looks far faster than 'Slow' and far more complete than 'Swiss cheese'. What do you make of it?

[eddie]

Here's an image from this A.M. of the area of coast between 60 and 90 East showing the coast out to the open ocean.

Now I don't know what was meant by Mr Gubine's 'slow melt' from the coast out nor his 'Swiss cheese' style melt of the pack when I view this.

To me it looks far faster than 'Slow' and far more complete than 'Swiss cheese'. What do you make of it?

It's hard to say if this is normal or not without looking at the same image from previous years.

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

It's hard to say if this is normal or not without looking at the same image from previous years.

It's normal! That wasn't the question.

Gray-Wolf was questioning whether existing models of sea ice melt are an accurate representation of the reality.

Which part of the Antarctic coast is that photo from, Gray-Wolf?

Edited September 23, 2007 by AtlanticFlamethrower

[eddie]

It's normal! That wasn't the question.

Gray-Wolf was questioning whether existing models of sea ice melt are an accurate representation of the reality.

Which part of the Antarctic coast is that photo from, Gray-Wolf?

Surely that is the most important question?

If that picture is a good representation of what happens every year around every part of the coast and it doesn't match what the models predict then you could use it to question the accuracy of the models. If that picuture is not a good representation of the norm then you can't use it to draw any conclusions about the models.

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

Surely that is the most important question?

If that picture is a good representation of what happens every year around every part of the coast and it doesn't match what the models predict then you could use it to question the accuracy of the models. If that picuture is not a good representation of the norm then you can't use it to draw any conclusions about the models.

Then start a thread on it. Good idea!

(This is not the thread to discuss models.)

[Gray-Wolf]

Hi A.F.,

I agree with you . If we feel we need to discuss the evolution of models and there accuracy maybe Science and Nature is a better forum!

The area I posted yesterday is between 60 and 90E (probably dead centre at 75E!) facing the Kerguelen Plateau (dead opposite the Peninsula).

Last year it was late October before we saw this level of fragmentation.

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

Hi A.F.,

I agree with you . If we feel we need to discuss the evolution of models and there accuracy maybe Science and Nature is a better forum!

The area I posted yesterday is between 60 and 90E (probably dead centre at 75E!) facing the Kerguelen Plateau (dead opposite the Peninsula).

Last year it was late October before we saw this level of fragmentation.

There is vast year-on-year variablity. Do you know what storm / synoptic set up caused this fragmentation?

[Gray-Wolf]

As I'd posted earlier I can't place a single 'event' that could cause the level of disruption around the continent other than the tides. Chris Knight over on Corinth's. thread has taken a little effort to outline the state of the moon the past few years (which is unique over the 18.6yr period). With the changing dynamics of the ice (both North and South) I feel the moon is having more of an impact on ice formation/disintegration than at any time in documented history.

[Gray-Wolf]

Bottoms! to late for an Edit!

This shows the area that , until March 2002, was an ice shelf (LarsenB). Now in rapid melt.

This shows how ice shelves are formed by glaciers extending over the open sea, sadly this is a remnant of the West Ross Ice shelf.

This is just a lovely image of the mountains and glaciers fringing the West of the Ross Sea (just on from the last image....if you're clever you can join the two up!)

EDIT: All images from this a.m.

Edited September 24, 2007 by Gray-Wolf

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

Antarctic sea ice remains at monster levels, and concentration

To compare here's September 24, 2006.

Difference especially notable in the east and south eastern sectors, but you will notice all around the coast the ice is thicker this year.

[Gray-Wolf]

4.13 is the official 'low'...

see: http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7006640.stm

--

So, 4.13, very impressive reduction, and by such a massive margin against the previous record, that even an ardent anti-climate change naysayer might even notice.

Calrissian: 2019: 0.0

Totally agree with you there Calrissian! so what has to happen that will have folk paying attention to our take on things without instantly labelling us 'doomsayers'?

[❄️❄️❄️❄️❄️❄️❄️❄️❄️]

meh

[Chris Knight]

meh

must be a typo - whore's yore spulchucker?

[Gray-Wolf]

A reply to Dev. from up above on Corinth's fine thread.

I was teasing you I'm afraid. We must agree that this years ice min. is somewhat special and the conditions that have started to prevail up there (climate aside) must be taken into account. Without sounding too dramatic the only comparable times to this year must have been at the end of glacials where the Pole became ice free.

We know that storm swells smash ice, even across the globe (the breakup of the remnant of B15 in Antarctica by a storm swell generated in the Bearing straights) so ,when the majority of the ice is relatively 'thin' single year ice, then surely the 'swell' produced at the two highest tides of the month could lead to a similar 'fragmentation of the ice (especially if the 'timing' is also favourable to this occurring just after the start of the spring thaw).

We know many factors (both past and present) have aided this years record ice minimum, none more than the poor condition of most of the ice across the polar region. The 'Cryosphere today' Sat. Movie of the build and breakup highlights well the rotation of the single year ice directly opposite the Bearing straights (as the H.P. dragged it around clockwise) but prior to the rotation there is a rapid 'fragmentation' of that mass of single year ice. I bet if we had it date on each image we'd find that the fragmentation event across that basin coincided with the high tides for that month.

Of course ,once it's integrity was compromised it was free to act more 'fluidly' and rotate under the influence of the H.P. (and present itself to the warm currents flowing in through the Bearing straights) further increasing it's ablation.

Were it not for the 'fragmentation event' the ice mass would have remained relatively 'anchored' with only the stretch facing the straights prey to the warmer waters.

I'm not going 'all Ken' on you ya see! It's just this years 'events' I'm interested in.

Ian.

EDIT: It would appear it was not just the ice cap that suffered this year!

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/...70925160630.htm

Edited September 25, 2007 by Gray-Wolf

[Roger J Smith]

I just posted on this general topic in the other arctic ice thread that Carinthian maintains -- the basic idea is that the current ice minimum may be a sign of larger ice reductions to come.

I didn't discuss this topic over there -- is this the minimum for now, or will it continue to erode away? I think it has reached a minimum, it would be unlikely to keep melting at this time of year, but weather patterns over the region will play a key role in that. My guess is that the ice margin will try to stage a comeback, and also that ice will begin to form in some places closer to Siberia as the continent cools down to -15 or -25 C in late October, then by maybe late November or early December the open water may start to reduce to large pockets in a forming thin ice cover again.

That's a very approximate guess based on what I think are the most probable temperatures across the region now that there is this anomaly in place. We'll see, all of this is very much speculation now, but who knows, perhaps the anomaly will over-stimulate the arctic circulation and induce some kind of wild and woolly compensation phase. At least that's what people will call it post-mortem if there are spectacular events around the high latitudes of the northern hemisphere this winter.

[Mr Sleet]

Looks like a new ice area record has been set boys

Maybe there is another software glitch

Previous record was 16.03, now looks to be over 16.1 msqkm

[Gray-Wolf]

As my screen captures have been showing this is not a reliable measure. It may well reflect the 'extent ' of the ice as it drifts/is pushed away from shore but the pack itself is already fragmented and many coastal strips are clear water. To my mind all it shows is how far ice can drift before it melts and seeing as we saw Bergs off South island N.Z. last year, thats quite far!!!

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

As my screen captures have been showing this is not a reliable measure. It may well reflect the 'extent ' of the ice as it drifts/is pushed away from shore but the pack itself is already fragmented and many coastal strips are clear water. To my mind all it shows is how far ice can drift before it melts and seeing as we saw Bergs off South island N.Z. last year, thats quite far!!!

Perhaps there is more ice to drift? Actually, not perhaps, compared to recent years my satellite charts show there is.

The new Southern Hemisphere sea ice record is still in place and has yet to be announced. I wonder what is keeping them.

[Chris Knight]

Perhaps there is more ice to drift? Actually, not perhaps, compared to recent years my satellite charts show there is.

The new Southern Hemisphere sea ice record is still in place and has yet to be announced. I wonder what is keeping them.

I think they are just being cautious, having reported the record broken prematurely, another week and they will report the new record, when the ice starts to show definite declines in some areas.