Arctic Ice 2009/2010

[masheeuk]

I have read in several places that volcanos have a negative impact on climate temperatures so was wondering if people think the eruption in Iceland could impact on this melt season or is the effect more transient.

Edited March 21, 2010 by masheeuk

[Gray-Wolf]

I think that the more explosive eruptions that pump sulphates high up into the stratosphere tend to be the ones that impact climate. Iceland sits astride/is part of the mid atlantic ridge and so has less explosive eruptions and more fissure eruptions.

Of course some of the eruptions melt the glaciers they sit under leading to catastrophic melt and floods which gives us better insight to ice dams when they fail (like the event that stopped the N.A.D. at the end of the last ice age and led to 1,000yrs of cooling) and the landscape feature they produce.

[MR EXTREMES]

I have read in several places that volcanos have a negative impact on climate temperatures so was wondering if people think the eruption in Iceland could impact on this melt season or is the effect more transient.

absolutely i think theres lots going on right now that will impact our climate,

alsaka has been busy last year with volacanic activity,

now iceland lots of feedback from the melt of glacier to plumes in the atmosphere.

chilly times to come me thinks this will help the ice.:ph34r:

graywolf we may have a post soon the arctic fight back.

[Gray-Wolf]

Gray-Wolf we may have a post soon the arctic fight back.

Though I'm sure we'll talk meantimes I'll see you in September and we can have a proper natter about the tidal pulls of our Gas giants on our tectonic system and whether it means a damn. As for Iceland 'tis a tiddly fissure eruption and you'd be better served checking on the 'ring of fire' around the Pacific if you want a climate changing event.

By Easter tell me the ice is doing well and if I can find no other reason than thick ice and cold I'll share it with you otherwise check the conditions (via MODIS) and wait an' see.

[stewfox]

Stew , please look at the images provided here;

http://rapidfire.sci...10079.terra.4km

click on an area and then zoom in to the 250m resolution.

Check out the peripheries of the ice and the areas where ice is shipped out of the arctic (Fram and Nares) do you see solid pack growing out or do you see fragmented pack drifting south and spreading over more area than it did before it broke up?

Why would I expect a solid pack growing out from pictures of the artic edge in late March ?

If you run the slides foward a few days to my untrained eye it shows what I expect ie day to day fluctuations. If your suggesting this year the fragmentation is markedly different please provide a link

It would be nice to have 14m sq kms of artic ice left by Easter but as you know season variations at this time of year have little correlation to the final outcome of Arctic ice spread by the end of summer.

The real interest will start in early July when we often see real diversions begin.

If you have a better measurement then IJJS then provide a link.

Artic ice volume would be good, happy to have a look.

If all this old ice is being flushed out as you suggest then clearly we could be in for a very poor final figure (end of summer)at present however I would hold on to them straws

Edited March 24, 2010 by stewfox

[Gray-Wolf]

Stew , I think you miss my point. Look at past images of the pack at this time of year (never mind their extent) and show me an equally disrupted pack in the regions we know export our Arctic ice. We are poised for a repeat of the melts of the past few years (and possibly more) because of the packs integrity/thickness alone. Granted, later in the melt season we'd be looking to favourable winds to ship out more ice (and not just spread it over a wider area) as we had in )07' but we are told that this will come to pass in the near future.

07's winds would not have shipped out the 85' pack in the same amounts because the 'mix' of ice gave us a stronger pack back then. Only since the start of the noughties did we have a messed up enough pack to allow the disaster of that year. Each year since has been even more of a mess (even less 'thick' ice) but the 'weather' has saved us.

In 07' 10% of the losses flowed out of the Nares straight but there was a lot of thick ,stubborn multiyear (from N.Greenland and the Canadian Archipelago) then. All winter ice has been crumbling and flowing into the North end of Nares.

N. Greenland is massively disrupted and missions over the ice of the Archipelago have been cancelled because of it's messed up state.

The majority of ice flows out into the Atlantic through Fram. Had a look at the state of that recently? Half of Svalbard saw no coastal ice this year with open water extending to the north of the islands. How many depressions have sat to the east of Svalbard this winter? how many will this summer? The northerly component on the west of the depressions is just pushing ice down the east coast of Greenland and has done all winter (take a peek at it now).

I expect what we have seen of the past 3 march to July melt periods will repeat this year (record or near record rates of ice loss) and from then on the winds will play a major role in how much more goes or stays within the Arctic. I am less hopeful than you of any type of 'recovery' and by summers end we will be measuring the 'volume' and so the 'new era' will be being documented so we can make no mistake about the 'state of the Arctic'.

Edited March 24, 2010 by Gray-Wolf

[Gray-Wolf]

Here again is reason to question this years 'ice extent';

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/climate-change-catastrophe-worst-ice-year-on-record-leads-to-harp-seals-demise-89105962.html

they are calling it a 'climate change catastrophe' but to me it highlights well that the -AO has 'extended' ice into more temperate areas (those impacted by the displaced cold) and that these , more southerly, areas will face a rapid melt out through April. The areas that ended up 'warm' are much farther north and will enable the pack there to disintegrate much fast having room to collapse into (and spread). This in turn leads to more ice area in contact with the warm ocean below and will force a faster melt.

I would expect that both the coming full moon (spring tide) and the geographic locations of ice will mean a steeper decline through April than the past couple of years (which have appeared to be 'slow melt' season starts).

If we accept that some northern areas did not make 'good ice' over winter and have seen the open water that already exists within the Arctic circle we must worry about the early melt period as this , in turn, will impact how quickly the 'inner pack' breaks up and travels/melts.

I am having serious concerns over the coming melt season as folk are not backing away from the 'record hot year' across the globe that is forecast.

Too many factors conspire against the pack's survival and many of those crying 'recovery' for the past 2 years will need to accept that they were fooled by 'smoke and mirrors' even though the truth was available to all as too the real state of the Arctic ice pack.

[stewfox]

Here again is reason to question this years 'ice extent';

http://www.prnewswir...e-89105962.html

they are calling it a 'climate change catastrophe' but to me it highlights well that the -AO has 'extended' ice into more temperate areas (those impacted by the displaced cold) and that these , more southerly, areas will face a rapid melt out through April. The areas that ended up 'warm' are much farther north and will enable the pack there to disintegrate much fast having room to collapse into (and spread). This in turn leads to more ice area in contact with the warm ocean below and will force a faster melt.

I would expect that both the coming full moon (spring tide) and the geographic locations of ice will mean a steeper decline through April than the past couple of years (which have appeared to be 'slow melt' season starts).

If we accept that some northern areas did not make 'good ice' over winter and have seen the open water that already exists within the Arctic circle we must worry about the early melt period as this , in turn, will impact how quickly the 'inner pack' breaks up and travels/melts.

I am having serious concerns over the coming melt season as folk are not backing away from the 'record hot year' across the globe that is forecast.

Too many factors conspire against the pack's survival and many of those crying 'recovery' for the past 2 years will need to accept that they were fooled by 'smoke and mirrors' even though the truth was available to all as too the real state of the Arctic ice pack.

A bit of cheery picking me thinks.

-AO has led to a milder arctic winter more so on the Canadian side then Eurasia me thinks (anyone got some proper stats?).

For this decade at least the 'melt season' up to July has been fairly consistent.

Let's see if there is rapid melt off in April early May with this framented ice meeting a quick doom in the warmer waters.

Anyway ice cover at present 2^nd highest this century at 14.28m another increase yesterday

If we are sub 500,000 below the average by Early May then lets worry, from what your saying thats likely.

Edited March 26, 2010 by stewfox

[The PIT]

Too many factors conspire against the pack's survival and many of those crying 'recovery' for the past 2 years will need to accept that they were fooled by 'smoke and mirrors' even though the truth was available to all as too the real state of the Arctic ice pack.

You've got to remember that these factors have always been there and will have helped to record higher levels of ice in the past as well. So no smoke and mirrors just a gentle shifting of goal posts.

Got to admit I keep looking at this thread too see whether the ice has all melted as some alarmists keep saying it would.

[stewfox]

Yes, 'ice extent' is not plummeting away right now but the only 'growth' I see is this stretching of the ice that has been there all winter. With the pack extended further south (in the areas affected by the AO generated polar outbreaks) this gives even more ocean area to spread over so you (or at least 'I') would expect the first couple of weeks to be slow work if storms aren't compacting the ice (and showing an 'exaggerated ' ice loss) but you can plainly see from the state of this years pack (or listen to the 'experts' on the subject) that we do not have a strong,well consolidated pack.We have a pack more disrupted over winter (and riddled with old leads re-frozen) which in turn will expose more surface area of this wafer thin ice to the sun/water earlier and so melt away faster and earlier in the season.

We are close to having Cryosat2 launched (after it's delays) and so are closer to having reliable 'thickness' measurements instead of this poorly performing 'extent'. In the meantime the U.S. 'Ice Bridge' mission will be giving us data on thickness over the next 6 weeks or so as they overfly the poler ice and measure it's 'thickness' in repeated passes.

We have already lost the majority perennial that characterised the 'old Arctic' and are now within the realms of the skimpy 'new arctic' and whilst 'extent' may mimic results from back then they do not represent the same thing. We can't compare apples and pears and expect to gain insight (apart from their differences).

A big rise of 59,000 sqkms up to 28^th March. Now at 14,299 219 m sqkms

http://www.ijis.iarc...aice_extent.htm

Anyone map the wind circulations up there, problem is I cant read any report without feeling it is inherently bias, kind of sad really but thats where the educated layman sits with the scientific community at present.

http://www.guardian....ice-loss-arctic

Edited March 29, 2010 by stewfox

[Gray-Wolf]

Seeing as we lose 90% of the ice through the Fram straight you only need to know the section between Svalbard and Greenland. During -ve AO the central core of ice flows in an anti-clockwise direction which just means the ice presenting at Fram comes from Siberia and not the Canadian side of things.

Most of the winter has seen L.P. to the NW of Svalbard (or so it appears to me) meaning northerlies have dominated the polar exit route and ice has flowed south from there into the Atlantic instead of Stagnating there and forming an ice dam (as it used to).

[pottyprof]

(as it used to).

In recent history.........

[The PIT]

Mmm looks like we're going to catch up 2003 for the amount ice. Surprised too see an increase again. http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm

[SteveB]

Very nice to see as Pit say's an increase, currently at 14.363.438^km2

Something to cheer about in this otherwise (as some would have us believe) depressing situation.

[stewfox]

Very nice to see as Pit say's an increase, currently at 14.363.438^km2

Something to cheer about in this otherwise (as some would have us believe) depressing situation.

Even I considered anything above 14m kms2 end of March a result. Not far off the 8th march max.

Now the big question has this got anything to do with it ??

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/technology/scientists+arches+concern+northeastern+canada/2629280/story.html

Is some the older ice being 'flushed out'

Or is it just with the -AO the Artic is playing catch

[Low Countries]

Even I considered anything above 14m kms2 end of March a result. Not far off the 8th march max.

Now the big question has this got anything to do with it ??

http://www.ottawacit...9280/story.html

Is some the older ice being 'flushed out'

Or is it just with the -AO the Artic is playing catch

Even at Accuweather they're getting excited about this

http://www.accuweath...ike-in-ice).asp

They think it's the cold in Siberia...

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Even at Accuweather they're getting excited about this

http://www.accuweath...ike-in-ice).asp

They think it's the cold in Siberia...

And that is the point. It is also cold in Alaska. The arctic was only mild 'relative to normal'. It was still cold enough to increase ice during winter months BUT Russia/Eurasia, US were well below normal thus no plumes or 'real warmth' pumping north penetrating the arctic and thus continued ice growth. This is why in turn we will see as the jet stream moving south as it has done and cyclically timed to do so, a downward turn in global temps in the next few years to decades and an increase in ice extent. This IMO is the start and is very interesting to see what is happening.

BFTP

[BornFromTheVoid]

14,405,781 km2 today. The 2010 line on the IJIS graph now starting to look somewhat out of place!

[The PIT]

14,405,781 km2 today. The 2010 line on the IJIS graph now starting to look somewhat out of place!

Well of course it's due to climate change and the warming planet.

[stewfox]

14,405,781 km2 today. The 2010 line on the IJIS graph now starting to look somewhat out of place!

With the Sun starting to head South in 11 weeks as well

[laserguy]

With the Sun starting to head South in 11 weeks as well

If it carries on like this there'll be 16m km2 come September . "It's worse than we thought". Yep,it sure is....

[pottyprof]

Certainly an interesting increase.

Will be interesting to see how low we get this year...

[Gray-Wolf]

For fear of looking like simpletons could you tone down the recent remarks of ice 'increase' . We all know that the marker for inclusion is 15% cover or more per so the 'fact' that those areas enveloped by the -VE AO plunges this past winter, and had developed sea ice, is now melting and spreading (triggering the 15% or more). Look at the Baltic and tell me what you see?

We now have full daylight at the pole so check out both;

http://www.woksat.info/wos.html

and

http://rapidfire.sci...10089.terra.4km

and tell me that the fringes show 'new' ice and not fractured, floating/drifting ice. Then work out whether the same ice covered as much sea when it was attached to the pack.

Do not be oblivious of the impacts of the full moon either. Pick up a sheet of ice 3mm thick from your pond/water butt and tell me what happens. Do the same when there's 20cm of ice and see what happens.

The bulge of water that courses under the pack as the spring tide reaches it's highest shatters thin ice.

Look back to the image of the leader I posted earlier on this past week and check that feature now.

Prattle on about ice extent yet ignore the open water at the pole?

Roll on summer.

EDIT: melting ice or new ice;

http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/subsets/?subset=Arctic_r02c03.2010089.terra

east coast of Greenland yesterday.

Edited March 31, 2010 by Gray-Wolf

[pottyprof]

No need for name calling GW.. I did say it was an interesting increase. I gave no reason why it was interesting..

[Gray-Wolf]

No need for name calling GW.. I did say it was an interesting increase. I gave no reason why it was interesting..

No name calling P.P. ,just a warning for those who may not be partial to humble pie consumption.

Seeing as I've been predicting this rise since the last full moon it's not 'interesting' ,just a predictable response.