Arctic Ice Discussion - 2010 Freeze Up

[barrel1234]

I would imagine that the sudden slowdown in the refreeze would be because of the spike in arctic temps, presumably there would be a slight lag time which would be why we are experiencing a sudden slowdown now

http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/plots/meanTarchive/meanT_2010.png

[Weather-history]

Found an article by C E P Brooks written in early 1924. In it comments that the Arctic Ocean was remarkably free from ice during summer and autumn 1923 pointing to unusually high sea temps. The Barents Sea ice-covered area was the least recorded since records began in 1895. The Kara sea ice-covered area was much less than normal and was practically free from ice during September and October. The White Sea was still open at the end of November.

Temperature anomalies recorded at Spitsbergen for the following autumn and winter

Oct 1923: +9F

Nov 1923: +14F

Dec 1923: +12F

Jan 1924: +15F

Feb 1924: +20F

Edited October 26, 2010 by Mr_Data

[jethro]

Thanks for that Mr D, I saw your post earlier in the other thread and was hoping you'd post it here too.

Have you got more info from times past relating to that area of the globe? It would be great to have an historical thread in this section, if you fancy doing it.

Pretty please......

[barrel1234]

Yes, i had see that too, and I was going to copy and paste it over here with reference and credit to you of course. Very Interesting indeed, and I think that it can add slightly more evidence to my view that the arctic is much more resilient than a lot of people think.

Edited October 26, 2010 by barrel1234

[Yorkshiresnows]

<br />Found an article by C E P Brooks written in early 1924. In it comments that the Arctic Ocean was remarkably free from ice during summer and autumn 1923 pointing to unusually high sea temps. The Barents Sea ice-covered area was the least recorded since records began in 1895. The Kara sea ice-covered area was much less than normal and was practically free from ice during September and October. The White Sea was still open at the end of November.<br /><br /><br />Temperature anomalies recorded at Spitsbergen for the following autumn and winter<br /><br />Oct 1923: +9F<br />Nov 1923: +14F<br />Dec 1923: +12F<br />Jan 1924: +15F<br />Feb 1924: +20F<br />

<br /><br /><br />

Great post.

I really cannot understand why people are so keen to dismiss the possible impacts of the PDO state. We've been in +PDO territory for the majoprity of the past 30 years ..... with arctic ice declining and antarctic ice increasing.

Surely there is at least the possibility that this has had an impact, peaking in 2007 ?

Its also only been in the last 30 years where highly detailed measurements have been taken .....so we really need to relax a little and see what gives over the next few (-PDO) years.

Y.S

[Devonian]

<br /><br /><br />

Great post.

I really cannot understand why people are so keen to dismiss the possible impacts of the PDO state. We've been in +PDO territory for the majoprity of the past 30 years ..... with arctic ice declining and antarctic ice increasing.

Surely there is at least the possibility that this has had an impact, peaking in 2007 ?

Its also only been in the last 30 years where highly detailed measurements have been taken .....so we really need to relax a little and see what gives over the next few (-PDO) years.

Y.S

Otoh, doesn't this (from Mr Data's quote from a 1924 report): The Barents Sea ice-covered area was the least recorded since records began in 1895. at least point to some quite detailed knowledge in the 1920's and perhaps in the late 1800's?

I think quite a bit is known about sea ice edge and indeed sea ice amount for part of the Arctic going back some time. Certainly for the Barents Sea? I think the record for the Barents Sea from 1895 to now would be worth looking at.

[barrel1234]

<br /><br /><br />

Great post.

I really cannot understand why people are so keen to dismiss the possible impacts of the PDO state. We've been in +PDO territory for the majoprity of the past 30 years ..... with arctic ice declining and antarctic ice increasing.

Surely there is at least the possibility that this has had an impact, peaking in 2007 ?

Its also only been in the last 30 years where highly detailed measurements have been taken .....so we really need to relax a little and see what gives over the next few (-PDO) years.

Y.S

Indeed thats very similar to my view and why this current time is so exciting, as you said we have had +PDO for so long now its going to be so interesting to see how long and deep the forthcoming -PDO period will be. I still maintain that it could be likely that many people could regret feeling sorry for the current state of the arctic, a large expansion over the next 50 years could have bigger negative effects that a reduction in ice mass would have on crop yields rainfall, growing seasons etc etc, But we will all have to wait and see and try and figure out what's happening along the way.

[Weather-history]

.

Temperature anomalies recorded at Spitsbergen for the following autumn and winter

Oct 1923: +9F

Nov 1923: +14F

Dec 1923: +12F

Jan 1924: +15F

Feb 1924: +20F

More +ve monthly anomalies for Spitsbergen that I have found from the 1920s and 1930s. No mean temps given and quite a few of the monthly reports just said Spitsbergen was above normal. So a warming period in that area during the 1920s and 1930s.

Jan 1928: +10F

Mar 1928: +6F

Dec 1928: +4F

Feb 1929: +20F

Mar 1929: +16F

Feb 1930: +15F

Mar 1930: +8.9F

Nov 1930: +12F

Jan 1931: +9F

Feb 1931: +23F

Apr 1931: +16F

Dec 1931: +11F

Mar 1932: +12F

Dec 1932: +12F

Jan 1933: +23.7F

Mar 1934: +23.9F

Deb 1934: 16.6F

Feb 1935: +18F

Jan 1937: +13F

Mar 1937: +10F

Apr 1937: +11F

Feb 1938: +10F

Mar 1938: +8F

Apr 1938: +5F

May 1938: +3F

Edited October 26, 2010 by Mr_Data

[BornFromTheVoid]

More +ve monthly anomalies for Spitsbergen that I have found from the 1920s and 1930s. No mean temps given and quite a few of the monthly reports just said Spitsbergen was above normal. So a warming period in that area during the 1920s and 1930s.

Cheers for those Mr Data.

Should we take it that the months not mentioned either didn't give a figure for the anomaly and/or were below average, or were the reports not issued for every month?

IJIS has updated, giving us a respectable enough gain of just under 84,000km2, which I imagine is close to or slightly below recent averages.

Great post.

I really cannot understand why people are so keen to dismiss the possible impacts of the PDO state. We've been in +PDO territory for the majoprity of the past 30 years ..... with arctic ice declining and antarctic ice increasing.

Surely there is at least the possibility that this has had an impact, peaking in 2007 ?

Its also only been in the last 30 years where highly detailed measurements have been taken .....so we really need to relax a little and see what gives over the next few (-PDO) years.

Y.S

The PDO definitely impacts upon Arctic sea ice, I think anybody that can't acknowledge that is being foolish. The only matter of debate, imo at least, is the extent of its effects.

We haven't got a whole lot of PDO data, and the cycles pre 1940 are a lot less clearly defined, generally sticking close to neutral values for the early part of the 20th century. I imagine temperatures in Spitsbergen would be more affected by changes in the AMO anyway.

Trying to extrapolate a trend from the PDO is more difficult than a simple ~30 year -ve/~30 year +ve, and so on.

If we assume that the PDO and global temperatures are linked, as with the correlation with the slight cooling between the 40s and 70s and the -ve PDO, then is all we should expect over the next 30 years a drop back to temps in the early 90s? I don't think that would really help the ice a whole lot tbh... or perhaps with the addition of a possible deep solar minima we could go back to temperatures more akin to the mid 20th century? Though I guess even that is starting to look just a little tenuous with new research linking a quiet sun and higher global temperatures!

I guess the only thing we definitely have is 30 years of precise ice extent measurements, which shows an accelerating decline overall. As for where we go from here, nobody knows for sure, but I don't think it's unreasonable for some to think the trend isn't going to reverse so easily...

[Weather-history]

Should we take it that the months not mentioned either didn't give a figure for the anomaly and/or were below average, or were the reports not issued for every month?

There are quite a few that just said Spitsbergen was above normal. They were very few that said Spitsbergen was below normal.

I posted this a couple of years ago. This was written back in early 1938

Edited October 26, 2010 by Mr_Data

[BornFromTheVoid]

A fascinating read, thanks

[Isolated Frost]

Hi everyone, I've been lurking round here for a while, as I find it really fascinating, and have tried to advance my knowledge in the subjects by reading some of the posts in this part of the forum, it doesn't seem so bad!

Very interesting read Mr. Data, I think that PDO affect Europe and the Arctic more than you would expect of an Pacific Oscillation system and it'll be interesting to see what affect La Nina will have on the Arctic this winter, especially a strong one.

[jethro]

Welcome to the climate area I F, good to see you here.

Thanks for that Mr. D - an interesting read.

[Gray-Wolf]

Cheers Mr D.!

Helps highlight how far beyond the 'mildly augmented' cycle (60-80yr cycles?) we are the next time we found ourselves in the same 'phase' of that cycle?

This seems to be some folks problem. They can recognise the cycles of the Arctic basin (even embracing the newest member) but , even though they surely see the difference?, they settle for the Arctic today merely being an expression of one or other cycle.

We have folk that point back towards other 'documented' warm phases (regional) or others who promise a return to the 'old Arctic' via 'natural cycles but none seem willing to embrace just how bad things are today in the Arctic?

I'd ask of those folk that "if we have been there done that" then please ,please ,please show me the data! I'd be a much happier Wolfie if I knew we are just repeating a short term cycle......

[4wd]

The significance is (unsurprisingly) ice volume can go up as well as down.

[Thundery wintry showers]

The Arctic was clearly anomalously warm during the 20s and 30s (I've seen some sources that suggest that the warm phase lasted through the 40s and 50s). There will almost certainly have been significant melting of the ice during this period. My feeling is that the period from the 1950s to 1980s, which saw the PDO/AMO switch to cooler phases in the Arctic, probably didn't provide much of a recovery (if any) to offset whatever melting occurred in the 20s through to the 40s/50s.

Therefore, while temperatures in the Arctic may or may not currently be warmer than they were in the 1930s, chances are the sea ice is starting off at a lower point than was the case during the previous warm period.

On this evidence, to see a sustained recovery we'd probably need global temperatures to, at the very least, drop below the 1961-90 average.

[BornFromTheVoid]

IJIS has updated to give us yet another day with low gains, yesterday just 53,907km2. This leaves us 3rd lowest on record, which will most likely be 2nd lowest by tomorrow as 2009 gained almost 200,000km2 on both the 27th and 28th October.

We're also only 400,000km2 above 2007, which gained over 700,000km2 between the 26th and 31st. If we don't start seeing some major gains now, we will find ouselves lowest on record before months end.

At the moment we have a moderate flow though Fram, which will continue for the next 5 days or so, but never gets particularly strong.

We also have a large depression approaching the Bering strait which will drag milder air into the Beaufort sea, possibly delaying the freeze-over there even further. As the depression weakens and drifts further east though, it drags coler air down through the Bering strait towards the Aleutian Island for their first proper cold blast of the season.

During the early days of Novemeber, conditions look very good for growth though with some very cold air entrenched across much of the Arctic Ocean and slack winds, so long as the forecast holds good!

[Gray-Wolf]

The significance is (unsurprisingly) ice volume can go up as well as down.

Quite obviously true for the 'Old Arctic' but if we are now into a new phase that is beyond recovery due to the impacts on ice volume through the 'warm phases' of the 20th century which were augmented by the warming trend man instigated.

I believe that this will be the 'moaning point' until folk, who feel this not to be the case, finally see the 'corpse' of the Old Arctic when we have our first seasonal pack (unless we have evidence of 'seasonal packs' intermittently over the past 11,500yrs?) and not before.

Please don't take me wrong , we would all dearly love to see the improbable occur but it is just too much of an 'ask' . If it took 2 of the 60-80yr warm cycles being 'augmented' by the warming we instigated then the 'recovery' would take the 'cool phases' plus a similar 'augmentation' to the cycle to run things in reverse. Even if we got this level of 'cooling' have we not also destroyed important areas of the 'Arctic system' that are needed to 'rebuild' the 'Old Arctic'?

Edited October 27, 2010 by Gray-Wolf

[Thundery wintry showers]

Streuth, sounds like the acceleration after the tipping point.

It could be, but equally it could be a consequence of temperatures in the extratropical Northern Hemisphere not rising significantly until the late 80s/early 90s, coupled with the Arctic moving into a warm phase similar to that between the 1920s and 1960s.

Quite obviously true for the 'Old Arctic' but if we are now into a new phase that is beyond recovery due to the impacts on ice volume through the 'warm phases' of the 20th century which were augmented by the warming trend man instigated.

I believe that this will be the 'moaning point' until folk, who feel this not to be the case, finally see the 'corpse' of the Old Arctic when we have our first seasonal pack (unless we have evidence of 'seasonal packs' intermittently over the past 11,500yrs?) and not before.

Please don't take me wrong , we would all dearly love to see the improbable occur but it is just too much of an 'ask' . If it took 2 of the 60-80yr warm cycles being 'augmented' by the warming we instigated then the 'recovery' would take the 'cool phases' plus a similar 'augmentation' to the cycle to run things in reverse. Even if we got this level of 'cooling' have we not also destroyed important areas of the 'Arctic system' that are needed to 'rebuild' the 'Old Arctic'?

GW, in all fairness I'm seeing symptoms of a very closed mind here- we have discussions on this topic, which uncover sources of evidence which overwhelmingly suggest that the ice will continue to melt significantly in future because of rising global temperatures coupled with the Arctic Amplification resulting in the Arctic warming at 2 to 3 times the global average, but give conflicting signals on "tipping points". And then, once such discussions have "passed over", you go back to insisting that we've definitely passed a "tipping point" as if those previous discussions had never occurred.

Sometimes the phrase "give it a rest" springs to mind. I don't think repeating the same assertions over and over again is going to "win many people over", especially when the top scientific researchers are in strong disagreement over the truth of your assertions.

[Gray-Wolf]

I don't see many folk linking up to any scientific papers that confirm that we are not beyond a tipping point for the Sea ice in the Arctic? We have paleo reconstructions pointing to regional variance in ice levels during the 'warm phases' of the Arctic's history but nothing to say we have had a basin wide ice loss of the scale we see today. We have not been treated to any papers on the oceanic processes of a paleo Arctic (loss of the Halocline layer etc) nor any indications of basin wide permafrost thaw (the opposite if the 'snow patch archaeology' is accurate?).

What have we seen that would necessitate me to 'update my understanding of where we are at regards 'tipping points' ?(remember TWS, this is an opinion and not an unquestionable 'Truth'?) within the Arctic sea ice.

You are keen to remind us that you can only project continued ice loss and continued global temp rises. When do these two things arrive at what you (personally) would recognise as a 'tipping point' for Arctic sea ice?

[Thundery wintry showers]

I don't see many folk linking up to any scientific papers that confirm that we are not beyond a tipping point for the Sea ice in the Arctic? We have paleo reconstructions pointing to regional variance in ice levels during the 'warm phases' of the Arctic's history but nothing to say we have had a basin wide ice loss of the scale we see today. We have not been treated to any papers on the oceanic processes of a paleo Arctic (loss of the Halocline layer etc) nor any indications of basin wide permafrost thaw (the opposite if the 'snow patch archaeology' is accurate?).

That's because there aren't any- surely, if there is considerable disagreement among scientists on the issue, that implies, by definition, that a verdict hasn't been "confirmed" one way or the other? Remember, I'm not suggesting that we definitely aren't beyond a tipping point, I'm merely suggesting that it is far from certain that we are, which is a much less strong position.

What have we seen that would necessitate me to 'update my understanding of where we are at regards 'tipping points' ?(remember TWS, this is an opinion and not an unquestionable 'Truth'?) within the Arctic sea ice.

You are keen to remind us that you can only project continued ice loss and continued global temp rises. When do these two things arrive at what you (personally) would recognise as a 'tipping point' for Arctic sea ice?

I would see it as a "tipping point" if we reach a level where, even if global temperatures stay constant or decline slightly, we inevitably see all of the ice disappear at the summer minimum, with the only variable being the length of time that it takes for all of the established ice to melt. It wouldn't have to be immediate- we could be talking several hundred years in the case of Greenland, but if it reaches the "inevitable barring exceptional circumstances" stage then I think it's still fair to call it a tipping point.

But I don't find the evidence for us being at that level entirely convincing as yet. A recovery has certainly been made more difficult, given constant or slightly falling global temperatures, but impossible? The data for 2007-08 cast doubt on this. And are we staring at a continued vicious cycle of ice loss or merely a readjustment to a new, lower, equilibrium level in response to higher temperatures? That's wherein the questions lie.

[Gray-Wolf]

I would imagine that 'ice decline' will not be a 'smooth line' decline but more in fits and starts like we see in the global temps record?

The period ,post 07', where we suffered the 'collapse and spread' phenomena fooled a few folks into thinking that the new 'stable zone' would be highere than it actually is. I feel that this year will represent the upper limit of this new 'stable zone' with potentials for higher and lower min extents.

I think we would do well to look out for 'novel' patterns setting up in the pack. I know we are studying the atmospheric impacts of the new Arctic Amplification but maybe we shouldn't ignore the ocean currents and how they impact upon ice growth and transport?

I'm starting to think that the Canadian Archipelago current, out into Baffin, may well act like another 'Nares' now the old perennial has melted out of the channels connecting it to the northern pack. We saw a lot of ice transported into the northwest passage over summer (where it melted) but over winter continuous movement of ice could well ice breaker a clear channel out into Baffin (and melt) all winter.

We saw the 'ice factory' running, at the end of last winter, with ice forming in the mouth of the Bering Straights and then being transported out into the Bering sea (plumping up the extent there?) without favourable temps this could just ship out young ice in the same way.

If this process were to continue all winter we would end up with very thin ice, in prone areas of the Basin,making for a very early melt come spring across these areas further adding to the positive feedback of ocean warming and ice melt.

I'm sure that this process alone would lead to a seasonal pack but the 'perfect storm' synoptic should no be ignored (as you reminded me we saw what a few weeks of it can accomplish with the new pack this June) and seeing as the two 'storms' before 07' were only 10 years apart (and not the upper limit of 20 years) we could be very close to the next appearance.

Anyway , back to the present. We seem to be slowing in our ice growth and October may well prove to be one of the lower ice gain Octobers in our records. Let's hope that we get a better month in November?

Edited October 27, 2010 by Gray-Wolf

[jethro]

That is all complete speculation.

[Gray-Wolf]

More conjecture;

27th Oct. If you look over the days before (and since) you can see how the ice moves;

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

I've looked ,long and hard, and I've seen this;

The 'image' highlights the last of the 'old ice' ( less than 5 yrs though?) and what looks like a journey to oblivion over winter?

Who says watching the ice grow ain't important?

[jethro]

Winter? We've still got a month left of Autumn. It's barely had time to get cold up there, give it a chance.