Arctic Ice

[Gray-Wolf]

The early 'refreeze' surely just reflects that ,for two years, we have had a lot more open water to refreeze????

The proof of the 'colder winter' pudding ,as it were, is surely the breaking of the 'mean' ice levels from 79'-2000....and we are a long way off doing that still. That said last early spring showed us that this is still possible. Then ,that said, surely ice levels plunging to second lowest from that unusual 'high point' indicates where we are headed?

I really cannot foresee a time when ice does not form in the high arctic over winter, my worry is it's retention through the summer months as the positive feedback of all the open water sunlight absorption continues.

Edited November 14, 2008 by Gray-Wolf

[Kained]

The early 'refreeze' surely just reflects that ,for two years, we have had a lot more open water to refreeze????

Could you explain the logic of that argument?

[The watcher]

A few questions.

Part of my research for the alternative forecast this year was finding average SST's throughout the last 38 years and comparing them to the SST's we have seen this year to give an idea to what extent sea temperatures will have on our winter climate for 2008/09. Now I have found that in our general area sea temperatures are below average for this time of year by nearly 2degrees. Is this a result of Larger arctic ice extent or is the Arctic ice extent a result of this?

We all know temperatures remain cold enough for the Arctic ice to remain during summer months (apart from a receeding large chunk), but if Sea temperatures rose and air temperature did not what would be the winning factor determining its existence?

What Iam trying to say really, is the Earth warming or is the oceans movement somehow making arctic waters slightly warmer, warm enough to melt ice quicker?

Probably a silly question but I just thought I'd ask......only starting to read into the Arctic ice out of interest.

Edited November 14, 2008 by The watcher

[jethro]

A few questions.

Part of my research for the alternative forecast this year was finding average SST's throughout the last 38 years and comparing them to the SST's we have seen this year to give an idea to what extent sea temperatures will have on our winter climate for 2008/09. Now I have found that in our general area sea temperatures are below average for this time of year by nearly 2degrees. Is this a result of Larger arctic ice extent or is the Arctic ice extent a result of this?

We all know temperatures remain cold enough for the Arctic ice to remain during summer months (apart from a receeding large chunk), but if Sea temperatures rose and air temperature did not what would be the winning factor determining its existence?

What Iam trying to say really, is the Earth warming or is the oceans movement somehow making arctic waters slightly warmer, warm enough to melt ice quicker?

Probably a silly question but I just thought I'd ask......only starting to read into the Arctic ice out of interest.

Not a silly question at all; here's a link for Polyakov who's widely considered to be the expert with the broadest knowledge on Arctic ocean currents/cycles. Although he doesn't argue strongly for a man-made influence upon ice loss, he does judge a proportion of the current warming to possibly be above natural variation. His work is accepted and cited by the IPCC.

http://www.frontier.iarc.uaf.edu/~igor/

[osmposm]

I note that global ice levels remain above the 1979-2000 mean....

Yes, I'm confused by this, too. Where is this from, WIB?

[osmposm]

(Gray-Wolf @ 14 Nov 2008, 08:23 AM)

The early 'refreeze' surely just reflects that ,for two years, we have had a lot more open water to refreeze????

Could you explain the logic of that argument?

K, if all you are looking at is the amount of re-freeze when it gets cold enough (and it probably always will be cold enough in the autumn/winter), then there is going to be more water turning to ice after a big melt, because there is, quite simply, more water to freeze. Water that is already ice cannot freeze - it is already frozen!

So if a larger amount of ice survives the summer, then by definition there is less potential re-freezing 'cos it's still frozen and cannot 're-freeze'.

I have a terrible feeling that I have made it not one jot clearer. Let me know!

Ossie

Edited November 14, 2008 by osmposm

[The PIT]

The early 'refreeze' surely just reflects that ,for two years, we have had a lot more open water to refreeze????

Or more likely it's just got colder earlier than it has in previous years. You're presuming that the cold air stays in the same place and doesn't expand outwards. If it continued to get colder the area of water exposed to possible freezing would grow would it not until you got down to the equator when there wouldn't be any more available.

[Kained]

Cheers Ossie, i just couldn't see GW's logic of an early refreeze relying on the amount of open water, when it should rely on the conditions affecting the potential to freeze. The amount that can be refrozen as you say is of course dependent on the amount available to refreeze.

[Gray-Wolf]

Could you explain the logic of that argument?

As has been gone into further up the topic if we take the 'Arctic' basin' alone (leaving the peripherals alone as ,being in lower latitudes they naturally freeze later in the season) we can see that the amount of 'open water' come summers end increased dramatically over the last 5 years with 07,08 and 05 heading the 'minimum table'.

Arctic ice does not remain 'still' if not locked in by itself. A look at the MODIS imagers for Aug will show the 'ice jam' that amassed to the North of Svalbard as the 'Arctic Gyre' tried to expel the ice into the Atlantic (between Greenland and NW Europe. A fair percentage of this ice was once positioned off Siberia. As such many areas of melted out waters also drift into high latitude positions (the reason that a 50/50 chance of an 'ice free geographic pole' that was mooted this year) as ice drifts into lower latitude positions.

In years gone by the amount of perennial ice to the north of Greenland up to the pole was very much higher and this 'thick ice' was more restricted the scope of movement in the high latitudes ,thus restricting the flow of ice into the lower latitudes, for the past few years this has not been the case.

Perennial ice is harder to melt than 'young ice', fresh water freezes faster than salt water. melted perennial produces mainly saltwater due to the processes that occur within over the period frozen.

So ,we find ourselves (at summers end), with vast stretches (when compared to 'old values') of surface fresh water in areas where the sun no longer shines. NSIDC log areas with over 30% ice concentration for it's 'ice extent records' and so the build up of ice appears quite rapid (in reality just filling in the spaces that in past times were already perennial ice) when the 'refreeze' begins.

Soon enough records of 'average ice extent' will update to reflect the recent low levels but seeing as 2005,2008 and 2007 are the current extremes then the 79' to 2000 'mean' has no chance of reflecting the current state of play (as the 'mean line' of ice extent well illustrates as folk are talking of 'record ice growth whilst it lags well below the 'average ice extent' for the time of year!).

I hope you at least 'get the drift' (and don't find yourself washed into the Atlantic!!!).

[Gray-Wolf]

correction to the babble above.

I did mean to say perennial produces 'mainly freshwater' and not 'saltwater' (honest) as such you can end up with areas of surface 'freshwater' which ,naturally, freeze faster than the saltwater below.

Sorry to confuse the confusion more!

I see the 'stall' continues. Even though we didn't end up with as little ice as last year if ice levels don't pick up sometime soon we'll find ourselves in a worst position than last year!!!! The other 'factor' is the neutral 'ENSO', last year the tail end of the La Nina helped with the late winter ice expansion, if we do stay neutral do you think we can rely upon this 'late winter rally' this year or are we going back to the poor start positions of previous years?

Due to a further reduction in the amount of perennial this past summer that would surely mean that 2007 will be passed with ease as the weaker single year ice melts out?

[Gray-Wolf]

If the 'stall' maintained until the weekend ice level would dip below the rolling mean. If we remember that the last seasons melt started from a position well above the 'mean' then you can infer what another 'average summer' (like last summer) would do to ice levels in the arctic basin.

I think we can all sense just how important it is to build ice levels much higher than the rolling mean if we wish to start to reverse the dramatic trend down wards . It also makes you realise how critical the winters now are with every drop away from the rolling mean adding to the problems of perennial ice retention.

[Iceberg]

Just read an interesting article on the ECM website.

The conclusions were basically, a decrease in the thickness of the ice allows more outbound flow as currents and winds find it easier to move the ice around.

This inturn allows more spread of the ice, in the autumn when the refreeze starts the ice is then more quickly created, this autumns being a perfect example.

I also noticed Carinth on the other thread mentioneding that ice flows where strong down Eastern Greenland.

It all seems to make sense and this might be negative feedback mechanism that brings the ice level back to equilibrium. However it is high risk as a serious summer melt would cause a major collapse of ice, tipping us to a new equilibrium. (this might have been what happen in 2007). It might also continue to happen ever time we get a serious summer melt.

[Gray-Wolf]

I wish I had such optimism Iceberg!

The loss of the 'tougher' stretches of perennial, to the north of Greenland, has basically removed the net that used to stop the hemorrhage of perennial into the N.Atlantic.

I first commented on this in 05' as the 'summer time lapse' of the ice decay showed plainly that the ice in that region (the old bastion for perennial) lurch north and then rotated anti-clockwise. In essence it lost it's anchorage to North Greenland and The Canadian archipelago and became free floating. It's breakup resulted in the summers of 07',08' and the wholesale loss of the perennial in that region (check out the concentration of perennial in this region since '02). Though not confirmed I feel our dire summers of the past two years have a direct link to the surface melt waters as they chilled the lower levels of T.M. air masses before they drenched us with the extra condensation the lower 'chilling' of the atmosphere had wrung out!

The 'safety net' of perennial has now gone and the single year ice is free to rotate and flush out into the N.Atlantic.

The other worry now is the impact of the free floating large bergs of perennial that still exist. The upper level provides a giant 'sail' and floats these monsters on the prevailing wind, this of course disrupts the thin single year in the same way an ice breaker would. In effect we have an ocean basin that is still mobile through winter and patrolled by many giant ice breakers.

Because all of this is new to us we can only postulate the processes now at work in the high arctic and watch and learn

[stewfox]

Sorry to confuse the confusion more!

I see the 'stall' continues.

I am glad you can now see the graphs

When the 2008 'red line' was moving up like a run away train , I think you had problems seeing it

Any sites that match 2008 data with 1980s or 1990s data re ice coverage ??

Looks like ice coverage is as high as any year, at this time in the last 6/7 years.Just like to see how far are we adrift of say 1995 or 1985 ? Re ice area at this time of year

[Iceberg]

I wish I had such optimism Iceberg!

The loss of the 'tougher' stretches of perennial, to the north of Greenland, has basically removed the net that used to stop the hemorrhage of perennial into the N.Atlantic.

I agree that the safety net might well have been removed, I am trying to keep an open mind though on it....

My view is that the likes of Polykov etc are probably right, but with the added edge of AGW we've pushed it just over the tip in 07, how it responds will be interesting, particularly how it responds in a synoptically good melting summer when we don't have a La Nina still working it's way through the system.

[laserguy]

http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent..._Ice_Extent.png

Zoom right in and as of now,the upturn appears to have resumed....

[Gray-Wolf]

No problem seeing the Graphs stewfox but if nothing special or noteworthy is occurring then why comment? I do recall seeking some calm as folk got carried away whilst the ice played 'catchup'......which it failed to do (see how far below the average we are) but apart from that we saw what we saw last year as the new stretches of open water refroze......

Areas of the Arctic that have traditionally 'melted out' over summer may keep to their normal rhythms but what of areas that do not typically melt out and have this past couple of years? Just the physical structure of those areas is now radically different with thinner ice holding everything together.

As such maybe keeping a close watch on just the Arctic Basin, and it's behaviours, may prove useful in understanding this 'new arctic'.

[Gray-Wolf]

Northern Hemisphere Snow Cover Extent

Northern Hemisphere Snow Cover Extent

for October 2008 As shown in the time series to the right, the mean Northern Hemisphere snow cover extent during October 2008 was below average. Much of this can be attributed to the above average temperatures across most of the Northern Hemisphere, where temperatures were 2-5°C (4°-9°F) in many places, leading to rapid snow melt. The Northern Hemisphere had the ninth least snow cover extent on record. The mean Northern Hemisphere October snow cover extent for the 1967-2008 period of record was 18.3 million square kilometres.

North America Snow Cover Extent

for October 2008 Across North America, snow cover for October 2008 was below average, the 16th least extent since satellite records began in 1967. The mean North America October snow cover extent was 8.12 million square kilometres for the 1967-2008 period of record. Significant winter storms brought heavy snow across parts of the U.S. During October 10-12, a winter storm dumped heavy accumulations of snow across the western states. The storm dumped as much as 83.8 cm (33 inches) of snow across parts of Wyoming. While in Montana, the city of Red Lodge recorded its highest snowfall total in a period of 24-hours when 107 cm (42 inches) of snow fell.

Eurasia Snow Cover

Extent for October 2008 As depicted in the time series to the right, Eurasia's snow cover extent during October 2008 was below average. This was the 11th least snow cover extent over the 41-year historical period. Much of this can be attributed to the above normal temperatures that covered most of the Asian continent. On average, the Eurasian snow cover extent in October was 10.2 million square kilometres for the 1967-2008 period of record.

Data were provided by the Global Snow Laboratory, Rutgers University.

[ top ]

Sea Ice Extent

October's Northern Hemisphere

Sea Ice Extent plot According to the National Snow and Ice Data Center, the October 2008 Northern Hemisphere sea ice extent, which is measured from passive microwave instruments onboard NOAA satellites, was the third least October sea ice extent on record, behind 2007 and 2006. Average ice extent during October 2008 was 8.4 million square kilometres, which is 9.5 percent below the 1979-2000 average. Sea ice extent for October has decreased at a rate of 5.4 percent per decade, since satellite records began in 1979.

October's Southern Hemisphere

Sea Ice Extent plot Meanwhile, the October 2008 Southern Hemisphere sea ice extent was slightly below the 1979-2000 mean. This was the eighth least sea ice extent in October (1.02 percent below the 1979-2000 mean) over the 30-year historical period. Sea ice extent for October has increased at a rate of 0.7 percent per decade.

For further information on the Northern and Southern Hemisphere snow and ice conditions, please visit the NSIDC News page, provided by the NOAA's National Snow and Ice Data center (NSIDC).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's nice to read a 'flat' roundup of conditions. If I'd have believed the hype I'd have thought that both snow and ice levels would have been above average but no! here we are in just as desperate a position as before all the tales of 'record snowfalls' and 'rapid re-freeze'. :lol:

Edited November 19, 2008 by Gray-Wolf

[stewfox]

North America Snow Cover Extent

for October 2008 Across North America, snow cover for October 2008 was below average, the 16th least extent since satellite records began in 1967.

It's nice to read a 'flat' roundup of conditions. If I'd have believed the hype I'd have thought that both snow and ice levels would have been above average but no! here we are in just as desperate a position as before all the tales of 'record snowfalls' and 'rapid re-freeze'. :lol:

Seems very average to me :lol:

[Gray-Wolf]

Seems very average to me

.....even though NASA have us in the cool phase of the PDO........strange that eh?

[J10]

I have updated the figures for the Arctic Ice, 2008 remains well above the 2003-07 average, and is only just below the highest in the series 2004.

[Gray-Wolf]

So it begins...........

********************************************************************************

First commercial ship sails through Northwest Passage: "I didn't see one cube of ice"

CBC News reports:

The Canadian Coast Guard has confirmed that in a major first, a commercial ship travelled through the Northwest Passage this fall to deliver supplies to communities in western Nunavut.

The MV Camilla Desgagnés, owned by Desgagnés Transarctik Inc., transported cargo from Montreal to the hamlets of Cambridge Bay, Kugluktuk, Gjoa Haven and Taloyoak in September.

"We did have a commercial cargo vessel that did the first scheduled run from Montreal, up through the eastern Arctic, through the Northwest Passage to deliver cargo to communities in the west," Brian LeBlanc of the Canadian Coast Guard told CBC News.

"That was the first , that I'm aware of anyway , commercial cargo delivery from the east through the Northwest Passage."

NEW ERA IN ARCTIC SHIPPING?

Don't worry deniers, delayers, and most conservatives, the CBC isn't really saying this is a new era. It's just the same old era, accept, of course, a lot warmer and a lot less icy thanks to human emissions.

For a ship to be able to travel through the Northwest Passage, which has historically been impassable with thick ice, had some wondering if the MV Camilla Desgagnés is heralding a new era in Arctic shipping.

Louie Kamookak, the director of hamlet housing and public works in Gjoa Haven, said tugboats and barges usually deliver supplies from the west. Residents were surprised to see the MV Camilla Desgagnés come in from the east, he said.

"Looks like it's going to be more shipping or ships travelling, with the ice clearing up north of this area," Kamookak said.

Kamookak said the vessel brought the hamlet some municipal equipment, including a sewage truck. It also provided local co-op stores with supplies.

The hamlet of Gjoa Haven will compare the costs of getting supplies shipped from the west versus the east, in order to see which direction may be cheaper.

Desgagnés Transarctik used the MV Camilla Desgagnés because it is a super ice-class vessel, said Waguih Rayes, the general manager of the company's Arctic division.

Rayes, who was on the vessel during its trip through the Northwest Passage, said the company informed the coast guard, which put an icebreaker on standby.

"They were ready to be there for us if we called them, but I didn’t see one cube of ice," he said.

"They were informed about our presence [and] they were ready to give us the support needed. However, since there was no ice whatsoever, the service was not needed, we didn't call for it."

Rayes said he's proud to know his company, which is a managing partner of Nunavut Sealink and Supply, is the first to deliver sealift cargo through the fabled Arctic waterway.

He added that the company plans to transport cargo through the Northwest Passage again next fall.

********************************************************************

"The science is beyond dispute. Delay is no longer an option. Denial is no longer an acceptable response."

Edited December 2, 2008 by Gray-Wolf

[Kained]

"The science is beyond dispute. Delay is no longer an option. Denial is no longer an acceptable response."

I don't know whether to find that statement humorous or a worrying indication of authoritarian dogma.

The article is third party circumstantial evidence from the general manager of a company that wishes to promote shipping in the area. You will of course note that they used an A1 super ice-class vessel, with the range for that type being A5 the highest and D0 the lowest ice strengthening. Obviously someone thought there was some risk involved.

It will be interesting if they are able to regularly repeat the trip.

[Gray-Wolf]

I don't know whether to find that statement humorous or a worrying indication of authoritarian dogma.

The article is third party circumstantial evidence from the general manager of a company that wishes to promote shipping in the area. You will of course note that they used an A1 super ice-class vessel, with the range for that type being A5 the highest and D0 the lowest ice strengthening. Obviously someone thought there was some risk involved.

It will be interesting if they are able to regularly repeat the trip.

I believe it to be Mr Hansen's 'quote', and it made me giggle too

I certainly wouldn't wander into the NW Passage without a hull that could at least deflect a chunk of perennial ice!!! All the blurb I've read about the passage becoming a 'viable option' seems to point towards a time when the perennial is no more. At present both the east coast of Greenland and the Archipelago seem to be the 'perennial graveyard' as it is flushed out from further north. The fact they encountered none is a minor miracle in itself (I'd believe) seeing as there was plenty about!

The Russian sector (NE passage?) seems a lot less of a trial as the blob of perennial drifted there in 07 ablated this year and the arctic Gyre seems to flow ice from that coast to our side of things. If you take a peep at the perennial concentrations you'll see it all (more or less) trapped on our side of the arctic and if you watch a time lapse of the season you'll quickly see why that should be.

I know the single year in the high arctic will persist through this season and (technically) become perennial in it's own right but (we are told) it takes 5 winters for it to compress/desalinate to the more 'common form' (of yore) of perennial that poses such a threat to shipping. Most ships find no problem with single year ice, especially if it only makes 1m in thickness!!!, so you'd imagine that many areas will be open to shipping from mid Aug through mid sept. The cash savings (especially for the likes of Japan who have to run the 'pirate risk' ) are immense if you can just nip over the top so market forces will offset the 'risks' soon enough. The other thing being that the Canadian coast guard will act as a motorway 'breakdown truck' and rake in a mint from vessels who have fallen foul of perennial (I imagine).

With Russia now building it's world beating nuclear ice breaker once the high Arctic is mainly single year then it will be sailing (keeping sea lanes open) all winter...that does not bode well for recovery.

[Kained]

An interesting question, if the Artic is in trouble then the additional shipping won't help.