Arctic ice

[Mondy]

Nothing to clutch at when you consider sea ice extent is greater than last year - all 1 million square km of it http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/..._timeseries.png

[Gray-Wolf]

Nothing to clutch at when you consider sea ice extent is greater than last year - all 1 million square km of it http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/..._timeseries.png

but isn't that a hell of a lot less than our normal conditions Delta? isn't that like saying "the operation was a great success but unfortunately the patient died"?

[jethro]

but isn't that a hell of a lot less than our normal conditions Delta? isn't that like saying "the operation was a great success but unfortunately the patient died"?

Wouldn't you think an extra 1 million square miles is a spectacular turn around from last year though? After all, no one would expect to go from record minimum levels to totally average, normal levels in 12 months surely? The predicted text is for progressive year on year loss with an expected total loss in less than 30 years isn't it? Can't recall seeing any prediction for less ice loss. Now I know it's a little early to say last years record won't be matched or broken, but it's looking increasingly unlikely. I for one consider that a cause for celebration

[Nick L]

but isn't that a hell of a lot less than our normal conditions Delta? isn't that like saying "the operation was a great success but unfortunately the patient died"?

But you can't expect ice go from way below average to above average in 12 months. This is a good start to a recovery and now we can only hope it continues.

[bluecon]

do I hear straws being clutched ever tighter???

Who is clutching these straws?

but isn't that a hell of a lot less than our normal conditions Delta? isn't that like saying "the operation was a great success but unfortunately the patient died"?

Well you have been predicting much less ice in the Arctic this year than last.

Are you changing your opinion?

Correct on all counts I believe!

Most interest seem to be focused around the 'Deep Channel' through the NW Passage as this would take even the largest of commercial vessels cutting journey times significantly.

The problem comes when ships decide to take this route as, as the recent paper on pollution from shipping showed us, that much soot blanketing the high arctic over summer will not help us retain the little amounts of perennial ice we have left.

Well we run huge diesel trucks through the Canadian Arctic every year over the ice roads. Much more soot than a boat and it doesn't seem to matter.

[Roger J Smith]

I believe the main source of arctic sooty deposition is eastern Asia far to the southwest of the region. And I've said before on this thread or at least this forum, that I believe sooty deposition is a greater threat to the ice than ambient temperatures so this is yet another weakness in the Kyoto approach which fails to hold China to the same standard as other nations.

As to the ice in the Northwest Passage, I seem to recall that the St Roch had to break through some areas of ice in the Northwest Passage. As far as a viable sea passage there is only one main Northwest Passage, the second one is much shallower and prone to ice buildups throughout the season.

I'm taking the middle ground on this comparison of ice extent in 2007 and 2008 ... time will tell what the eventual comparison at maximum ice-melt in September looks like, and I'm predicting with lots of uncertainty that it will amount to another large ice-free anomaly in roughly the same sectors north of eastern Siberia. I recall that last year this sector only began to develop a large clearance of ice after mid-August, although it was probably beginning to show up north of the Bering at about this stage.

I've got to say, despite the fact that this debate has gone on for at least five years in roughly the same way, there is no sign of recognition of the fact that there are more than two possible "schools of thought" about ice coverage. There are probably five distinct schools of thought for northern ice (I will leave out southern ice which has a different set of paradigms).

1. Ice cover generally decreasing due to AGW, leading to milder winter climates in general.

2. Ice cover already past some minimum and now increasing, casting doubt on AGW.

3,. Ice cover either decreasing or near a minimum due to natural cycles and not necessarily indicative of milder winter climates because of feedback.

4. Random variability still in place, nothing really happening so no reason to predict change in any direction.

5. Ice cover decrease may be largely from sooty deposition and albedo change, results uncertain, could be atmospheric warming or could be unstable changes due to snow cover increases associated.

Now with five different paradigms in place, each having a different "lesson" about AGW, we have a more complex problem than the debate would suggest. What are the lessons about AGW by the way?

Related to these five paradigms above, they are:

1. With this, AGW a major concern, rising sea levels could be reasonably expected within 20-30 years.

2. Here, AGW an invalid theory, widespread concerns overblown.

3. AGW not a major factor, no harm in reducing greenhouse gases in this scenario but not much confidence it will help.

4. Same as 2.

5. AGW concern wrongly focussed on greenhouse gas and Kyoto approach contains fatal error with regard to China and Asian pollution in general, this being the main problem and not greenhouse gas from North America or Europe.

So as far as I am concerned, it may be a sort of blend of perhaps 2, 4 and 5. I wonder if in the future we will come to realize that the ten years we have wasted debating Kyoto could have been used profitably to put the brakes on Asian sooty deposition production rates, and that instead we had a largely unproductive and irrelevant talkfest about targets that other nations might set on greenhouse gas emissions. The sooty deposition problem was identified as early as 1995 as I recall. I know that I've been personally concerned about its role in this question for at least ten years.

But we should not get trapped into the limited paradigm of thinking that reduced ice cover means warmer climates.

[Gray-Wolf]

Well you have been predicting much less ice in the Arctic this year than last.

Are you changing your opinion?

Are we confusing 'mass' with 'extent' again bluey?

As far as comparing a teensy weensy truck to a big ,big, big, boat.........

I take it you have absolutely no idea of what you are talking about .........oh well

[Mr Sleet]

I believe the main source of arctic sooty deposition is eastern Asia far to the southwest of the region. And I've said before on this thread or at least this forum, that I believe sooty deposition is a greater threat to the ice than ambient temperatures so this is yet another weakness in the Kyoto approach which fails to hold China to the same standard as other nations.

As to the ice in the Northwest Passage, I seem to recall that the St Roch had to break through some areas of ice in the Northwest Passage. As far as a viable sea passage there is only one main Northwest Passage, the second one is much shallower and prone to ice buildups throughout the season.

I'm taking the middle ground on this comparison of ice extent in 2007 and 2008 ... time will tell what the eventual comparison at maximum ice-melt in September looks like, and I'm predicting with lots of uncertainty that it will amount to another large ice-free anomaly in roughly the same sectors north of eastern Siberia. I recall that last year this sector only began to develop a large clearance of ice after mid-August, although it was probably beginning to show up north of the Bering at about this stage.

Roger, I enjoy reading your posts and I agree with you that soot deposition is a greater threat to arctic ice than ambient temperatures.

However, the Siberian sector was very ice free even in July 2007..so I think 2008 will be much better.

[trevw]

Just posted this in the summer discussion arctic ice reports thread as that is what I was reading when I came across the nsidc update - thought I'd chuck it in here as well:

Interestingly it has been said a lot that the ice is much thinner this year - I have said it myself and read it all over the web, however looking at the latest nsidc update it seems that the situation is less cut and dried than that - definitely less perenial ice but the single year ice is thicker than one would intuit:

the first-year ice that formed since last autumn, while spatially extensive, has a mean thickness of 1.6 meters (5.2 feet), which is close to the thickness seen in 2006 and 2007. Much of this season's first-year ice formed rather late last autumn, so we had expected to see thinner first-year ice.

So why is the first-year ice thicker than anticipated? Sparse snow cover last winter may have hastened its growth: less snow on the ice means less insulation from the frigid winter air, and faster ice growth. Much of the snowfall over the Arctic Ocean occurs in early autumn, but early last autumn much of the Arctic Ocean was still ice-free and could not collect snow. Once the ice formed, it grew quickly.

Looking at the satellite images thickness is definitely worse than last year, just not as much as one would expect?

Trev

[bluecon]

Are we confusing 'mass' with 'extent' again bluey?

As far as comparing a teensy weensy truck to a big ,big, big, boat.........

I take it you have absolutely no idea of what you are talking about .........oh well

The trucks are huge diesels of 500+ hp carrying 100,000lb loads across the ice.

Teensy weensy lorries by English standards?

And with modern technology soot traps are standard on the new diesels. Could be put on any diesel. Now you can sleep better I hope.

As to the ice in the Northwest Passage, I seem to recall that the St Roch had to break through some areas of ice in the Northwest Passage. As far as a viable sea passage there is only one main Northwest Passage, the second one is much shallower and prone to ice buildups throughout the season.

The St. Roch took the southern poute the first time through the passage and was froze in for a couple years. On the return voyage they took the more northern route and I don't believe they had to break any ice.

Edited July 18, 2008 by bluecon

[Iceberg]

Blue do you have any evidence for that becuase that's not my understanding about it taking the northern deep water route.

[Red Raven]

The trucks are huge diesels of 500+ hp carrying 100,000lb loads across the ice.

Teensy weensy lorries by English standards?

And with modern technology soot traps are standard on the new diesels. Could be put on any diesel. Now you can sleep better I hope.

The St. Roch took the southern poute the first time through the passage and was froze in for a couple years. On the return voyage they took the more northern route and I don't believe they had to break any ice.

Economies of scale have dictated an upward trend in sizes of container ships in order to reduce costs. One limit on ship size is the "Suezmax" standard, or the largest theoretical ship capable of passing through the Suez Canal, which measures 14,000 TEU. Such a vessel would displace 137,000 metric tons of deadweight (DWT), be 400 meters long, more than 50 meters wide, have a draft of nearly 15 metres, and use more than 85 MW (113,987hp) to achieve 25.5 knots, specifications met by the Emma Mærsk.

Beyond Suezmax lies the "Malaccamax" (for Straits of Malacca) ship of 18,000 TEU, displacing 300,000 DWT, 470 meters long, 60 meters wide, 16 meters of draft, and using more than 100 MW (134,102hp) for 25.5 knots. This is most likely the limit before a major restructuring of world container trade routes.[5] The biggest constraint of this design, the absence of a capable single engine, has been overcome by the MAN B&W K108ME-C.

100,000hp is a little larger than even the american sized truck.

[Gray-Wolf]

100,000hp is a little larger than even the american sized truck.

Ta Red Raven!

I thought only I could see the difference between a hulking great container ship/super tanker and a lorry for a bit there.....

[kippure]

I see how everyone is here always talking about artic ice and how much there is and isnt, Just a personal and eyewitness veiw from a plane while working up in nunavat north of yellowknife that may 25th and june 30th all the small lakes where still frozen solid no ice had broken at that time and the pilot was telling us that the cold was lasting much longer then before.

[Gray-Wolf]

Thanks for that Kip!

What's your take on the Ruskies and your Govt. carving up the mineral rights up their in the arctic? Don't you think Norway and U.S.A. have similar pillaging rights or are you two hoping to accrue more rights by shouting loudest?

If we are in a warming world then the Arctic (and then Antarctica) will melt, if not, then they won't. End of Saga.

How's it lookin' so far?

[kippure]

Thanks for that Kip!

What's your take on the Ruskies and your Govt. carving up the mineral rights up their in the arctic? Don't you think Norway and U.S.A. have similar pillaging rights or are you two hoping to accrue more rights by shouting loudest?

If we are in a warming world then the Arctic (and then Antarctica) will melt, if not, then they won't. End of Saga.

How's it lookin' so far?

Well, im irish and just working in the oil industry. I think and what ive heard canada is the biggest supplier of oil to usa. Dont know about the rest. I think native people should own the rights to the whole place and not have super powers come in and take what they want. As for last winter there was week when we couldnt go outside, thats cold and has not happened in a long time. So far this summer, it has not been as warm as previous years. Maybe its a blip or something else (heading towards 2012) .

All i know is the northern hemisphere (northern canada) hasnt been this cold in a very long time. Even the local inuits said it was cold.

[bluecon]

Ta Red Raven!

I thought only I could see the difference between a hulking great container ship/super tanker and a lorry for a bit there.....

Except for the fact that there are hundreds of these trucks running around the ice all winter.

And when you install a particulate trap in the exhaust the argument is moot since the particulate matter is not released.

Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine research

"The probability that in 2008 the ice extent will fall below the minimum from September 2007 is about 8%, the probability to fall below the minimum of 2005 (second lowest value in the last 20 years) is practically 100%. With a probability of 80% the minimum ice extent in 2008 will be in the range between 4.16 and 4.70 million km^2"

http://www.awi.de/en/research/research_div...008_an_outlook/

Blue do you have any evidence for that becuase that's not my understanding about it taking the northern deep water route.

"During 1944 east to west passage Larsen used the previously uncharted, deepwater route through Lancaster Sound and Prince of Wales Strait, a route that he had intended to use eastward in 1940. This route was subsequently followed by large naval (HMC Labrador - 1954) and commercial ships as well as American submarines (1946 - Sea Dragon). "

http://lit.lib.ru/t/tatarin_l_s/msword-29.shtml

[Roger J Smith]

Kippure, glad to hear you haven't been carried off by those northern Alberta mosquitoes.

That's interesting about the lake ice cover, however, the climatology of lake ice in that region shows that most small lakes north of the tree line, as well as much larger Great Bear Lake, usually have extensive ice in early July and lose it in late July. Last summer I flew back from the UK on July 12 and despite clear skies and temperatures near 20 C over the region around Baker Lake, some of the lakes had partial ice cover, some had shallow ice floes near their northern ends (blown there by southerly winds) and some were ice-free. It is also normal for the northeast arm of Great Slave Lake to have some remaining ice into late June or early July although the main portion of that lake opens up in May, usually. Even in northern Saskatchewan there can be lake ice persisting into early July, I think I saw one or two patches in some lakes near 59 N before the ground disappeared under cloud cover, which was too bad because I was hoping to see the oil sands region but by the time we got to Lesser Slave Lake in Alberta it was just starting to clear up again.

I think it's true that this past six weeks have been colder than average over Alberta, the NWT and parts of Nunavut, probably by about 2 C degrees. Yukon has been near normal also. I think that temperature anomalies have been closer to zero or positive as you go west through Alaska into Siberia. This trend is actually intensifying at the moment.

Year to year variations have always been there and don't really tell us much about longer-term trends or the theories that affect those trends.

That was interesting reading about the thickness of the new ice too. It may take some doing then to open up a large area from Wrangel to the New Siberian Islands. Did you know that Wrangel Island still had relic mammoths, notably smaller than their Ice Age ancestors, wandering around until 1700 BC when they finally went extinct, possibly due to hunting from new arrivals?

[Iceberg]

Blue, the prince of wales straight is the short cut to be used when pack ice is blocking the end of the deep water NW passage.

There is also no evidence that he went though there without encountering ice. If we was forced to go the prince of wales route then ice must have been an issue.

[bluecon]

Blue, the prince of wales straight is the short cut to be used when pack ice is blocking the end of the deep water NW passage.

There is also no evidence that he went though there without encountering ice. If we was forced to go the prince of wales route then ice must have been an issue.

Link to a map of Larsen's routes through the NW Passage.

Larsen wrote a book about the trip.

http://www.ucalgary.ca/arcticexpedition/larsenexpeditions

Edited July 18, 2008 by bluecon

[Mondy]

I noted a "clutching of straws" phrase in one of the threads recently from an "alarmist" - The alarmist actually uses this particular word in his sig, so I assume it's ok to mention it?

Would any of the other alarmists care to comment on the fact the Hudson Bay still has ice evident right now, much later than in recent years? Temps there are considerably warmer than other Arctic areas, yet it's not melted.

[Snowball Earth!]

Your wasting your time Delta these alarmist only see what they like to see

[Mondy]

I note sea ice has thwarted a team reaching the Kinnvika scientific base on Nordaustlandet Island, Svalbard.

They planned to stay there for 20 dyas, but the extent of ice soon put paid to that. Already enroute home to Norway.

[Nick L]

I note sea ice has thwarted a team reaching the Kinnvika scientific base on Nordaustlandet Island, Svalbard.

They planned to stay there for 20 dyas, but the extent of ice soon put paid to that. Already enroute home to Norway.

Where you hear/read this? Not the BBC surely...

[Mondy]

I will quote all from a yahoo group I frequent.

You might need a Swedish or Norwegian translator once into the websites!

1-Mika will be operating from Kinnvika

base,Nordaustlandet island,Spitzberg archipelago in July

during 20 days.

The scientific station at Kinnvika was erected and taken into

service during the third polar year, also called the International

Geophysical Year 1957-58 by Swedish-Finnish-Swiss expeditions.

Kinnvika hosted overwintering teams over two prosecutive years, and was the base for three Swedish expeditions during the 1960-1990s.

Today, the Norwegian authorities have the major responsibility of

the station.

2- Kinnvika home page

http://www.kinnvika.net/

3-Also Mika could be on the research vessel "RV Horizont-2"

which supply Kinnvika from Longyearbyen.

http://www.kinnvika.net/?Deptid=19622

With that, it's transpired "Mika" and team did not make it to the island due to sea ice.

Meant to add. Although the dates mention 2007 in the above link, you might want to check out 2008 here

Edited July 18, 2008 by Delta X-Ray