Arctic Ice Discussion (The Melt)

[BornFromTheVoid]

I agree, with all the complexities, it seems we're still some way from working out what drives the PDO (which is a pattern of SSTAs, as opposed to a current, which I presume was just a thought slip-up on your part!?), AMO and to a certain extent ENSO. Knowledge of their causes would be very much welcomed by many, and likely explain a lot.

I'm not claiming that the sea ice directly influences the PDO, though if it did, I'd imagine it would only be one of many factors that do and that it would be incredibly difficult to work out what kind of effect it does have. One mechanism by which the sea ice changes may indirectly influence the PDO, would be through the Dipole Anomaly. The DA has become quite prevalent since 2006 (through the melt season months at least), which may be related to the sea ice losses and their feedback on the atmosphere. The change, which has continued strongly in the last 2 months, may be influencing the relationship mentioned in the paper earlier between the AO and PDO, as well as in numerous other way which haven't been tested.

Of course, these are little more than musings, but interesting all the same, and great at providing ideas for my masters dissertation next year!

Anywho, what I was saying in the last post, was more that the effect of the PDO (and the various other drivers) on the sea ice will likely have changed as the ice has thinned and become more fragmented. Winds, ocean temperatures, air temperatures etc., will all influence thinner, fragmented in a different way to thicker, consolidated ice.

The BC issue is interesting, but I'd imagine the difficulties in modelling aerosols at that level of detail should be closer to getting resolved in the coming years. The article you linked to seems legitimate enough, though my knowledge of the models used in it is next to zero, so in those situations I tend to rely on the peer review system kinda "OK-ing" the methods used for me.

[Gray-Wolf]

That was the very same question I was about to ask, J...I wonder if the early signs of 'large teapot' Syndrome are beginning to appear?

The last paper I saw on the PDO made great bones about the 'modern PDO (post 1980) having an AGW signature to it. It seems common sense to me that a phenomina defined by temps would be impacted by rising temps?

This is another reason that I think the call, back in 98/99, for the flip to PDO-ve will be accepted when we flip into neutral/positive and this negative phase is 'defined' (and not the one made a decade later when we were, to me and others, mid way through the cycle and in it's lowest temp phase?) It would be telling enough if this low temp run was just able to tip the 'old measure' into negative when the 'old PDO' would have been easily spottable in 98' (post super nino) had we not seen a milding in the lower temps?

EDIT Megalania, for those who do not know, is a member of the monitor lizard family and it is suggested that kimodo dragons are island dwarf versions of this 30ft monster

Edit;Edit; black Carbon? I'm sure this has impacts on. Ice fields and glaciers where summer melt 'concentrates' the carbon across the surface as ablation takes place. As for the sea ice? Well we really so not have much ice over 3 years old any more so we have a potential for 3 years of accumulated snow. following Polarstern and other icebreakers has me believing that none of the snow , laid down in previous winters, survives the following melt season and the runoff poolsappear to leave pristine ice behind.

As noted earlier the largest impact to be found in ice melt appears to be the ice Albedo feedback loop with basal melt of 2m+ being measured in areas that have early open water (again ,the concern about Beaufort and East Siberain sea this season)

EDIT;Edit;edit; Nares ice bridge is seeing a little bit of collapse. If the 'blue' ice of the modis is indicative of melt pooling and imminent collapse (as it appears) then watch the N.W. Passage deep chanel over the next week or so!!!

Edited June 18, 2012 by Gray-Wolf

[Gray-Wolf]

The 'Arctic mosiac ' seems to show that the L.P. did indeed lead to a disruption of the ice in the high Arctic? Ever more dark water ever earlier in the season,

you can also see that the 'blue' (slushy ice/melt ponds) is now spreading into the lincoln sea so once Nares opens we will probably see instant transport from there out into the warmed waters of N.Baffin.

I also think that the East coast of Greenland (Fram ice) has picked up it's pace of melt .I'd even hazard a guess that C.T. figures will pick up on this over the next few days.

And the basin ? Well it looks like the H.P. wants to come back over the Canadian side so even more sun for this part of the basin?

And losses well i think we were supposed to see some kind of slow down over the past couple of days but it does not seem to have occured? I've heard it mooted that we have had record reductions ,for the time of year, over the last 10 days? And a 'compensating Antarctic?' well , C.T. has the global anom touching 2 million sq km!!! you'd expect that come ice min in Sept but prior to the proper onset of N.Hemishere melt???

[BornFromTheVoid]

There's been a big increase in sea ice area on CT, with most regions showing a small jump, so perhaps it's related to a change in algorithm to deal with the melt ponding? Suppose we'll see tomorrow... Now only 360,000km2 below the next lowest on record for the time of year anyway

Meanwhile, there are forest fires raging in Siberia already, which can be seen on the MODIS images, so the chance of some extra black carbon getting into the mix.

http://www.rt.com/news/prime-time/wildfires-russia-greenpeace-predictions-113/

[Polar Maritime]

[BornFromTheVoid]

A quick update on the sea ice extent.

About 80,000km2 of lowest on record.

Unfortunately it looks like the current +ve AO will soon revert back to the +ve dipole pattern, so if it lasts then July will be interesting.

http://www.meteociel.fr/modeles/ecmwf.php?ech=72&mode=1&map=1&type=0&archive=0

[Gray-Wolf]

Effectively the low has just disrupted the ice both in the center ,where the low passed through, and the peripheries. I accept what BFTV reckons has now occured with the 'extent' algoritmn but would also think that there has been some 'relaxing' of the pack (Laptev?, East Siberian?) into the open waters. The wider the leads the more heat gets absorbed, over a wider area, around floes.

Recently we have seen a number of 'synoptics' that used to help the pack build and maintain perennial ice do exactly the opposite to it?

[BornFromTheVoid]

A little analysis of the summer so far and a short forecast.

First off, we're still 3rd lowest on record for extent, and lowest on record for area. The last 2 days have seen slight upward ticks in the both area and extent, followed by a moderate drop. This is likely down to a reversal in wind patterns allowing the sea ice to spread out in places such as the Beaufort and Chukchi sea. A change in the concentration algorithm for the summer to deal with the extra melt ponding may have had an effect, as well as the blue ice issue which seems to still be causing a lot of variation in concentration where there is none (at least there doesn't appear to be on the visual imagery).

The rate of loss in the last month seems particularly high, so I though a look at the temperatures at both the 850 and 925hPa level might reveal something.

Here's an animation of the 850hPa temperature anomalies from May 20th to June 20th since 2005

It's clear in the animation, that both 2011 and 2010 had higher upper air temperatures during the period which may go some way towards explaining why they both had lower extent values up to this point. It's also interesting to note how warm 2005 was also.

Here's the 925hPa anomalies for the same period.

2011 and 2012 much closer in anomalies in this, with 2010 not looking as bad. 2005 is again looking quite warm.

Here are the SLP anomalies

The clear dipole pattern that has been established already this year is clearly visible.

Anyway, looking ahead... at the moment we have a clear +ve AO pattern with low pressure in control across the Arctic Ocean. This is partly responsible for the spread of ice mentioned earlier, but has also caused disruption of the main pack, leading to spots of open ocean becoming widespread in the Arctic Basin, as GW mentioned earlier.

The +ve AO looks like fading over the next 2 days and being replaced once more by a +ve DIpole pattern

The 8-10 day 500hPa mean comparison shows a strong ridge developing through Greenland and the Canadian Archipelago and that side of the Arctic, with lower heights towards the Eurasian side.

The building ridge may also begin dragging much warmer air into Arctic Canada, causing a rapid thaw to the Canadian Archipelago and Hudson, as well as thinning the thick ice that has built up along northern Greenland and and the Canadian side of the Arctic basin.

My guess then, is for a slow down in ice loss over the coming week, with us moving back from lowest ice area on record to about 3rd lowest on record, while sea ice extent will fall further behind 2010 and 2011, whilst moving closer to 2006.

If the current medium range forecast patterns turns out to be true, then the melt rate will likely accelerate back above average at the end of this month and into July, but that's a little far off.

[Gray-Wolf]

Just eyeballing the general state of the ice in the basin. Unlike previous years where we have seen big slabs of ice in the central region (run through with leads) we seem to have the rubble from last summers late melt with small , well rounded, floes with an indescriminate pattern of open water in between? It does very much look like ice capable of melting out over the next 2 1/2 months to me.

If we are very fortunate a sudden burst of strengthening in the Nino now building could bring cloudy conditions across the basin later in summer and limit the ice loss? If the basin is now incontrol of it's own weather patterns then all bets are off!

That said if we do see even more ice loss (and know that certain areas of the basin have been soaking up solar since late May) then what of Autumn/early winter? If we see the same reduction in temp/pressure gradient between pole and mid latitudes ,as we have these past years, then any WAA into the Basin may also hold an added heat bonus from the warm surface of the Nino event?

Are we on the cusp of another major change across the Arctic similar to what 07's summer brought us (remember last winters poor ice formation in Barentsz/Kara and low thickness gains in Beaufort/East Siberian Sea) but with autumn/winter seeing a range of changes to a 'normal packs behaviour and not just summer?

[BornFromTheVoid]

Was having a look through the MODIS Arctic mosaic just a while ago, and spotted something a little off in south west Greenland.

After the blue ice thing this year, and also having followed the warm weather that has been affecting the Baffin sea over the last week it kind of caught my attention.

With a closer look, loads of drainage channels and what i think are moulins (drainage sink holes) dotted along the coast.

Anywho, looking back at the same date, for the 3 previous years, it was clear that this was unique in that time frame for this point in the summer at least.

I had a quick look through the MODIS images from the last few summers, but couldn't find anything in that area that looks similar, though I'm sure there must be other examples greater than this.

Obviously, this is down to the warm weather in the area in the last week (just incase any sceptics here get the wrong idea!), but it seems pretty interesting to me.

[songster]

Those are supraglacial melt lakes - consider the scale. A single pixel is 250m, so those features are kilometres across. That would be one heck of a moulin...

Edited June 24, 2012 by songster

[BornFromTheVoid]

Yeh, you're right, getting a little ahead of myself perhaps!? But they do seem considerably more widespread than than at recent year, and their interesting all the same!

[Gray-Wolf]

I believe we are moving towards an Arctic where we see 'fantastic' events (in real time ,via MODIS) before the press ever put out there garbled version (see it and make your own mind up!).

We currently have a second 'ice bridge' to the south of the Lincoln Sea? When have we seen that before?

I believe that , due to ice thickness, when the northern passage/ NW passage open up we will see another spectacle 'new' to our viewing in the swiftness that they will clear ('flash melt'?)

Spectacle aside we need be mindful of the amount of energy (above that of the last 5 years) that the ocean will amass this summer (let us not forget that ice 1m thick allows a substantial amount of energy into the ocean below). How will this manifest over Autumn/Early winter? I'd be booking a late break in the UK to make the most of the 'Indian Summer' such disruption to N. Hemisphere circulation must drive?

MODIS also highlights the space the past L.P. has placed between floes in the high Arctic.... to me none of this is good, it ain't July yet!!!

[4wd]

Spectacle aside we need be mindful of the amount of energy (above that of the last 5 years) that the ocean will amass this summer (let us not forget that ice 1m thick allows a substantial amount of energy into the ocean below). How will this manifest over Autumn/Early winter? I'd be booking a late break in the UK to make the most of the 'Indian Summer' such disruption to N. Hemisphere circulation must drive?

Don't see why, open water results in net loss of energy not gain at Arctic latitudes.

[Gray-Wolf]

Don't see why, open water results in net loss of energy not gain at Arctic latitudes.

Ha, Ha ,Ha!, Nice one four!

For those of us outside this "in joke" let the wider public know how swapping the most reflective surface area we have on the planet by the most absorbant asccomplishes this 'trick'?

For my part the deployed buoy programme shows the extent that 'open water' has on surrounding ice floes (by the upsurge in bottom melt, 5 or 6 times beyond the amount 'top melt' accrues over sunny weather and so opening more water to absorb energy) but i'm sure you have the data to show how this impact is dwarfed by the 'cooling effect' this dark water places on the N.Hemisphere?

***For those in doubt look at the figures measured in "ice albedo Feedback", both prior to the open water (07') and afterward. If you read the same as me you'll find that the 'math' prior to the actual was far to low in it's estimates than the reality has shown us over the last 5 years***

[jethro]

Ha, Ha ,Ha!, Nice one four!

For those of us outside this "in joke" let the wider public know how swapping the most reflective surface area we have on the planet by the most absorbant asccomplishes this 'trick'?

For my part the deployed buoy programme shows the extent that 'open water' has on surrounding ice floes (by the upsurge in bottom melt, 5 or 6 times beyond the amount 'top melt' accrues over sunny weather and so opening more water to absorb energy) but i'm sure you have the data to show how this impact is dwarfed by the 'cooling effect' this dark water places on the N.Hemisphere?

***For those in doubt look at the figures measured in "ice albedo Feedback", both prior to the open water (07') and afterward. If you read the same as me you'll find that the 'math' prior to the actual was far to low in it's estimates than the reality has shown us over the last 5 years***

You speak with far greater certainty than the world's leading Arctic experts.

How?

[Methuselah]

Don't see why, open water results in net loss of energy not gain at Arctic latitudes.

But less of a 'net loss' than thousands of square miles of ice?

[Gray-Wolf]

You speak with far greater certainty than the world's leading Arctic experts.

How?

J' , i don't make this stuff up you know so someone , somewhere is spouting the data. i'm sorry you cannot upload UTube as the last swathe of data I sat through was found there. The data was presented in seminars, in various locations, since 2010 and the research is ongoing. Though at times the presentation of the data can be offputting I'm sure that most of us can digest the data after a couple of views ,

Obviously the work being done has not yet made it into papers, hence the importance of the yearly updates on 'ongoing studies',

To some folk this would appear to 'exclude' all of this data from our 'knowledge base' as it is not yet 'peer reviewed' literature. I would dispute this view. I am sure that each of these meetings will have a written up version of the lecture (and data) somewhere online to enable those interested to follow these studies year on year (like the East Siberian shelf Sea permafrost destabilisation etc)?

For those folk still wishing to play the 'blame game' as to why we are seeing the Arctic acting this way i believe we are closer than ever to providing as definative an answer, to the question, as science ever gives but more importantly, to my mind, is the speed at which we are now seeing change in the Arctic.

We appear now to have advanced beyond the slow 'drip,drip' forcings of the past 100yrs and are entering a period of rapid changes driven by positive natural feedback loops. The 'Ice Albedo feedback' is presently the largest of these and we appear to have plenty of ongoing research monitoring the changes and impacts.

[jethro]

Hmmm.

So, there are no papers and no peer reviewed papers. Going by that standard, it should be ok for anyone to randomly come out with 'facts' or 'theories' on any manner of things to do with climate. I could have sworn the bar was set higher than that, at least when wanting to have a serious discussion about anything science based and in particular, climate science. At least that was the requirement when I persuaded David Dilley to come on here, and for that matter, Ernst Beck. They were both summarily dismissed on the basis that their work hadn't been peer reviewed.

Personally speaking, I'll wait until the research is complete and the papers have both been published and peer reviewed. IMO, to do less than that has a whiff of buying into whatever supports a personal view, regardless of the quality of the work.

[BornFromTheVoid]

There is quite a difference between experts in their field of research discussing current findings and observations, which are in the process of going through peer review (if I'm understanding GW correctly), and non-experts who avoid peer review because their work wouldn't pass it.

[songster]

Um, this isn't stuff that requires peer review, it's very very basic science.

Open water during the melt season increases heat absorption, because water is darker than ice. This is not a controversial fact! This is what GW was talking about in post #283. To state, as 4wd seemed to, that increased open water leads to summer heat loss is a logical impossibility. You can't say that the Arctic is simultaneously gaining heat (i.e. melting more ice and exposing more water) and losing it (radiating more heat from the now-open water). I presume this is why GW was quite so incredulous about being contradicted on it, and he's quite justified in that!

The flip side is that open water during the re-freeze increases heat loss, because ice is an insulator. This again is not controversial. It's an open question as to which effect is stronger overall - but note that this relates more to loss of winter ice cover than summer ice cover. That is, it's a question of whether the increased ice formation during the re-freeze is sufficient to offset the increased ice loss in the summer. In fact, it's precisely this extra heat input from the open ocean to the atmosphere above that may (note cautious phrasing) be affecting autumn and winter weather patterns. This last part is not settled yet - and note that GW posed this as a question in #283.

Yes, there are real unknowns and scientific controversies related to Arctic ice melt. The fact that in sunlight, exposed water absorbs more heat than ice is not one of them!

[jethro]

But there are no experts in the field of Earth's radiation budget and how this works in the Arctic. In an ideal world it would be as simple as saying no ice means dark ocean, which means greater absorption of energy. But this isn't an ideal world and it isn't that simple - that's why there are no absolute answers available as yet. If folk want to postulate ideas, (whether they be experts or interested amateurs) that's fine but what isn't fine is speaking in absolute terms when that certainty just doesn't exist. If we set the bar at peer review we should all stick to it, not pick and choose as the mood suits.

The problems with solving this puzzle are many and a solution is a long time hence; one of the greatest problems is measuring and deciding what's going on with the clouds up there. Technically, the Arctic is a desert, it's very dry up there - does the greater expanse of open ocean alter this? If so, how? Are there more energy trapping clouds or more high, reflective clouds? What is the net difference in albedo between open ocean and dirty, carbon polluted ice? Do the almost annual Siberian forest fires actually cause less long term harm if the soot falls into open ocean?

And these are just a few questions off the top of my head, there are more.

[BornFromTheVoid]

The might be of interest to you Jethro

http://www.colorado.edu/geography/class_homepages/geog_4271_f11/readings/week_12_13_serreze_barry_arctic_amp.pdf

It has (at least partial) answers for your questions.

[Methuselah]

Um, this isn't stuff that requires peer review, it's very very basic science.

Open water during the melt season increases heat absorption, because water is darker than ice. This is not a controversial fact! This is what GW was talking about in post #283. To state, as 4wd seemed to, that increased open water leads to summer heat loss is a logical impossibility. You can't say that the Arctic is simultaneously gaining heat (i.e. melting more ice and exposing more water) and losing it (radiating more heat from the now-open water). I presume this is why GW was quite so incredulous about being contradicted on it, and he's quite justified in that!

The flip side is that open water during the re-freeze increases heat loss, because ice is an insulator. This again is not controversial. It's an open question as to which effect is stronger overall - but note that this relates more to loss of winter ice cover than summer ice cover. That is, it's a question of whether the increased ice formation during the re-freeze is sufficient to offset the increased ice loss in the summer. In fact, it's precisely this extra heat input from the open ocean to the atmosphere above that may (note cautious phrasing) be affecting autumn and winter weather patterns. This last part is not settled yet - and note that GW posed this as a question in #283.

Yes, there are real unknowns and scientific controversies related to Arctic ice melt. The fact that in sunlight, exposed water absorbs more heat than ice is not one of them!

Yes it is simple: a black 'body' will absorb radiation that a white one will reflect. Any radiation, once reflected back into space, plays no further part in the Earth's heat-distribution systems...

[jethro]

Yes it is simple: a black 'body' will absorb radiation that a white one will reflect. Any radiation, once reflected back into space, plays no further part in the Earth's heat-distribution systems...

It isn't that simple, it really isn't.

And to add to my earlier questions.....what difference does open water make when the Sun goes down at the end of the Summer? Is there a window of opportunity for more heat to be radiated away before re-freeze takes place? How does this balance against the lost albedo during the Summer?

Thanks for that BFTV, I'll read it later.

Edited June 25, 2012 by jethro
Thought of another question...