Arctic Ice Discussion (The Melt)

[jethro]

I kinda feel that there are two things occurring at once here Pete?

I think the first is that the Arctic ice is reducing at an alarming rate and some folk would wish not to be reminded of this fact.

I think the second is that whenever 'ice loss' gets a mention in the news it is always portrayed as the 'Canary in the coal mine as far as AGW is concerned.

Some folk appear to view climate change as some kind of 'game' that is to be won or lost?

When one of the supposed 'indicators of AGW is showing such frightening changes in line with AGW's prediction' then the folk 'against' AGW feel they are 'losing' (I'm sure the extreme weather in the USA is doing much the same to the 'anti-AGW' crew?) and get a tad 'snipey'.

I'm sure we both know that AGW is no game/conspiracy and we are all the losers should the predictions prove to be correct.

It is a shame that some folk discriminate in this way for there are a few of us that do hold a deep interest in witnessing the changes that are occurring in the Arctic (and trying to understand how these changes are evolving over time and how quickly they are occurring!) and it is hurtful to be belittled for following something we are interested in.

Ho hum, takes all types eh?

That's your opinion and I respect that. My opinion is that the above is bunkum.

It's also my opinion that to hold a personal view and to have the freedom to express it, is no reflection upon other differing opinions nor to be taken in any way, shape or form as belittle-ling opinions which differ from our own.

Back to the subject in hand, what, if anything, do people expect to learn from such close scrutiny of the seasonal melt? And before any body jumps on me again - that's a genuine question, there is no under-current of sniping, belittle-ling or any other bizarre connotation.

[jethro]

To be fair BFTV excellent updates has reduced this year the mindless banter . Previous years every day the new IJIS reading led to some bias commentry.

Anyway I can see ice reduction 3-4th July slowing down with an alarming speed, a early re freeze ??

Agreed.

But I wasn't replying to something he'd posted.

[knocker]

The 500mb analysis for midnight GMT.

[BornFromTheVoid]

The latest NSIDC update, with the June analysis.

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

Some very interesting (tedious) stuff in there. Among other things, they mention towards the end about how 11cm of thickness was lost from the ice in single warm 24 hour period just off shore from Barrow in Alaska.

Also, based on the monthly snow cover rankings here, April, May and June have been the 4th lowest, 2nd lowest and the lowest monthly snow cover areas on record respectively.

[laserguy]

“The Arctic is screaming,â€

Oh Gawd. I'm not surprised,what with all the prodding and poking it's being subjected to. Like undergoing a post mortem whilst you're very much alive and kicking.

[Gray-Wolf]

I think that to find the level of interest in the current Arctic you must first understand that this is a very different Arctic to the one that existed 20years ago?

For those of us accepting of the notion it is very important to study the melt season as it progresses and to witness the way this 'new Arctic' responds to the new forcings it faces. The most important of these(to me) is the 'albedo flip', which we see across swathes of the basin, and it's impacts on the ablation of the ice.

As the latest NSIDC report points out we can see some frightening rates of surface ablation across the basin, later in the season, when bottom melt takes over. these melt figures become even larger with 14cm a day not being uncommon, and this is set against a thin pack dominated by F.Y. ice.

We do have an awful lot of ways to witness the melt season and swathes of data from past melt years to compare with. Anyone who has a reasonable working knowledge of the subject area will know why this season is a worry and demands close scrutiny?

BFTV is our own resident 'expert' on certain areas of the changes in the Arctic and their wider impacts and so it is very generous of him to bring both his expertise and time to the Arctic thread through the year and it would be a shame to see him 'baited' in withdrawing/being banned from the area.

I have a gut feeling that if this inane banter continues we will end up losing the thread (and some of us our posting rights) and so would ask for folk to focus on the melt season alone and take the nastiness elsewhere. The changes in the Arctic will not go away just because a small group of folk push to close this thread and rob folk of the opportunity to witness them day to day.

If you do not wish to witness them in this way then go away. If you do not 'see' the changes as folk portray them then post your views and back them up with the level of evidence we are accustomed to here?

EDIT: http://www.jaxa.jp/press/2012/07/20120704_shizuku_e.html

Looks like we'll be back to the new JAXA sat by the onset of re-freeze?

Edited July 6, 2012 by Gray-Wolf

[Gray-Wolf]

Back to the subject in hand, what, if anything, do people expect to learn from such close scrutiny of the seasonal melt? And before any body jumps on me again - that's a genuine question, there is no under-current of sniping, belittle-ling or any other bizarre connotation.

Well , just to bring it into context. we have Prince Charles in hebden today looking at the damage the floods brought. meanwhile our river is about 5cm from tripping the flood warning sirens with an afternoons heavy rain yet to come. I know we(you and I) have talked for years about whether we are seeing an increase in such extremes or merely 'weather' but seeing as each conversation has been driven by yet another 'extreme' weather event it would appear that history is edging toward it being more than just 'weather' (I detect a pattern emerging?)

Across the pond they are also midst climate extremes prompting similar debates.

Why are such extremes appearing to be on the up? is there anything else 'extreme' occurring on the planet that may well help us find a reason for such an 'uptick' in extreme weather events?

Some of us would direct folks attention poleward and the massive changes 'ongoing' there. It is this 'ongoing' nature which demands such close scrutiny as we are not yet at the 'extreme' of the changes that look likely to be linked to the 'changes' we are all witnessing/dealing with.

The 'Albedo Flip', which we have witnessed occurring through the noughties, now allows obscene amounts of energy to flood into the ocean up there over mid to late summer and this energy ,in turn, increases the melt of the sea ice (whilst also driving other atmospheric changes later in the season).

This year the ice mass in the basin will hit the amount left after 07's melt by mid July. with the western end of the basin now as impacted as our side so how will this reduced ice mass deal with the energy now being accrued all around it? Couple this with the flow of the older ice into Fram and you may believe that we have a set up that will bring an ice min as impacting as the 07' one (which brought us a low 26% greater than any other measured!).

Our experts warn us that when the end of summer sea ice does arrive it will do so very swiftly (imagine how quick a few cm's of ice melts out when the basal rate of ablation is 14cm /day!) and I find it is this 'rapid change' that demands such daily scrutiny?

Some folk just won't see the fascination and I accept that, they themselves may have interests in other areas that we may find deeply boring and as such enquire as to why the subject 'floats their boat'. I would not dream , on receiving their reply, in belittling their interest due to it holding no interest for me nor would I seek to obstruct/disrupt them in their pursuit just because i could not accept it as 'interesting'?

Anyhow next year promises peak solar input and an El-nino so maybe this will drive a little more concern/interest in the comings, and more importantly, goings of the Arctic Basin?

[jethro]

I think that to find the level of interest in the current Arctic you must first understand that this is a very different Arctic to the one that existed 20years ago?

For those of us accepting of the notion it is very important to study the melt season as it progresses and to witness the way this 'new Arctic' responds to the new forcings it faces. The most important of these(to me) is the 'albedo flip', which we see across swathes of the basin, and it's impacts on the ablation of the ice.

As the latest NSIDC report points out we can see some frightening rates of surface ablation across the basin, later in the season, when bottom melt takes over. these melt figures become even larger with 14cm a day not being uncommon, and this is set against a thin pack dominated by F.Y. ice.

We do have an awful lot of ways to witness the melt season and swathes of data from past melt years to compare with. Anyone who has a reasonable working knowledge of the subject area will know why this season is a worry and demands close scrutiny?

BFTV is our own resident 'expert' on certain areas of the changes in the Arctic and their wider impacts and so it is very generous of him to bring both his expertise and time to the Arctic thread through the year and it would be a shame to see him 'baited' in withdrawing/being banned from the area.

I have a gut feeling that if this inane banter continues we will end up losing the thread (and some of us our posting rights) and so would ask for folk to focus on the melt season alone and take the nastiness elsewhere. The changes in the Arctic will not go away just because a small group of folk push to close this thread and rob folk of the opportunity to witness them day to day.

If you do not wish to witness them in this way then go away. If you do not 'see' the changes as folk portray them then post your views and back them up with the level of evidence we are accustomed to here?

EDIT: http://www.jaxa.jp/p..._shizuku_e.html

Looks like we'll be back to the new JAXA sat by the onset of re-freeze?

That's all well and good GW but you are one of the first to post baiting comments. I admire the attitude above but if you would apply the same principles to yourself and your posts, there may not be a kickback. The sanctimony wears a little thin when you talk as though you're an innocent bystander.

[Gray-Wolf]

PIOMAS is now out for June (http://psc.apl.washi...php echo time() )? Looks like we'll be dropping below the min volume we got in 07' by mid July?

When we look at the current extent compared to that of sept 07' that will give us a neat way to visualise how thin that ice currently is.

We know that open water soaks up a lot of the suns heat so how will that heat now impact this remaining thin ice?

BFTV asked ,earlier in the thread, whether the heat currently building in sections of the Beaufort Sea would be 'drifted' ,via the Gyre, under the skim of remaining ice. I answered 'Yes' , it must.

What then of the heat absorbed in the rest of that sea area if the ice there is melted out ? Will it be being drawn into the Trans Arctic drift and under the ice currently over the pole?

We watch the ice over melt season to firstly spot anoms like the 'hot water' in Beaufort and then to witness whether our theories about the behaviour/impact of those observations pan out over the season.

The more often we get it right the more likely it is that the 'lurkers' will give respect to any further predictions we make regarding ice loss/behaviour.

As far as I am witnessing things the warnings about ice loss this summer that we gave this spring, midst the media clamour about Bering posting 'average values', are now showing themselves to have been both well observed and well founded.

I do hope that our growing concerns about the rest of the season do not prove to be as astute?

Edited July 6, 2012 by jethro
Enough already

[stewfox]

The latest NSIDC update, with the June analysis.

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

Some very interesting (tedious) stuff in there. Among other things, they mention towards the end about how 11cm of thickness was lost from the ice in single warm 24 hour period just off shore from Barrow in Alaska.

Also, based on the monthly snow cover rankings here, April, May and June have been the 4th lowest, 2nd lowest and the lowest monthly snow cover areas on record respectively.

Interesting at Barrow..

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

Prior to the onset of melt, the ice was thicker than observed in recent years – around 1.8 meters (5.9 feet) as compared to typical conditions of around 1.4 meters (4.6 feet).

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

Also for the Artic as a whole Ice melt 3 weeks ahead of the long term average , reading it like that doesnt seem so bad

[Gray-Wolf]

http://lance-modis.eosdis.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/imagery/single.cgi?image=crefl1_143.A2012189032500-2012189033000.250m.jpg

The image above show the Area of the Arctic ocean containing our 'best' (thickest/oldest) ice. The top of the image is the coast of the Canadian Archipelago with the right hand corner being the NW tip of Greenland.

The ice was supposed to be up to 5m thick.

I would have expected to see a mass of contiguous ice, rucked, ridged and over-ridden but the image clearly does not show this at all. to me it shows 'ice rubble' from the coast deep into the Arctic ocean (bottom of the image).

The ice from here ,if it survives, will form the 'backbone' of next years pack and will again be the very best of the ice in the basin.

This, to me, is a worry.

[BornFromTheVoid]

Also for the Artic as a whole Ice melt 3 weeks ahead of the long term average , reading it like that doesnt seem so bad

But when you put it in the perspective that the average daily loss in July is about 76,000km2, 3 weeks actually adds up to being about 1.6 million km2 (over 6 times the land area of the UK!)

[Gray-Wolf]

Maybe we are seeing folk trying to see the glass as 1/2 full BFTV?

Below I've posted up July 5th. one is this year's the other 96'. The 'average' melt out figures are comprised from years like 96' where losses would be expected from the low concentration areas around the edges of the pack. Now look at this years 'low concentration' areas . With such large areas of the pack (looks like a shot from 'ice min' really) already compromised and surrounded by open water I'm imagining that we shall see high losses, even with average weather, for the rest of July? I'm also of the belief that ,due to past experiences of 'media baiting' NSIDC are very conservative with their press releases now preferring to be amazed after the event than to be 'doomsayer' before the event?

[knocker]

A short note on ice-albedo feedbacks.

The ice-albedo feedback mechanism only works during the period when there is solar radiation, but it can be extremely imIportant during the spring when the Sun returns and there is still extensive ice and snow. Key factors in ice-albedo feedbacks in the sea ice zone are the timing of seasonal transitions, the evolution of summer melt ponds and the duration of summer melt. In a warming world it is usually assumed that there will be a longer ice melt season, with an earlier start to the summer melt and a later start to the winter freeze-up. In addition, it is expected that there will be more ponding on sea ice. All these factors will result in stronger feedbacks. However, there might be more subtle changes in the nature of the sea ice that could have an impact on the feedbacks. For example, there could be a higher percentage of first-year ice compared with multi-year ice, and there may be an increase in snowfall at high latitudes (see Section 7.4), so changing the surface albedo. However, while a deeper snow layer on the sea ice would reduce surface melt early in summer, it could also result in greater pond coverage and potentially greater surface ablation later in the season.

Changes in the ice-albedo feedback could also have an impact on the interactions between the marine and terrestrial environments. For example, earlier melting ofthe snow cover over land would result in significant increases in the total heat input to the ground. In coastal areas, this would result in more rapid melting offast ice hard up against the shore. This could extend the ice-free season and expose the coast to more storms and erosion. Changing environmental factors could therefore produce complex changes in the air-sea-ice conditions and the possible feedbacks may therefore be highly non-linear.

As discussed in Chapter 7, many climate models predict that over the next century the greatest temperature increases will be at high latitudes, and particularly in the Arctic. This is felt to be due, at least in part, to ice-albedo feedbacks. We will return in Chapter 7 to consider the reasons for the large predicted warmings at high latitudes.

Source:

John Turner and Gareth J. Marshall, "Climate Change in the Polar Regions", Cambridge University Press.

[Gray-Wolf]

It's just such a shame that time is so short to study the impacts of things like the Albedo flip and the Arctic amplification.

It just appears to me like the A.A. messed with the N.H. circulation over the winter months . This time around that lead to W.A.A. into the N.E. of the USA drying the ground there and making high heat levels there, later, more likely. once that H.P. was established the heat helps keep the H.P. intact and leads to us being on the bottom end of a very sinuous polar jet 'loop' giving us our lovely summer weather.

It is becoming ever easier to see the pressure anoms that arise in late Autumn/early winter due to the warm air rising out of the ocean across the Arctic but it takes 'teleconnections' to see the impacts later in the season.

We have other 'unfortunate links' that a warming planet has brought into play Take the beetles that have lead to widespread tree death in the areas of the Forrest fires. would those beetles have been be flourishing now if we were not seeing the planet warm and their range expanding ever northward?

The one thing i am not seeing are 'positives' that current changes are bringing us? Is this media bias??

[4wd]

It just appears to me like the A.A. messed with the N.H. circulation over the winter months .

Why would that happen just once, you can't claim some correlation on the basis of one year.

It would need to keep occurring with increased frequency.

You may have a point that the dry and hot HP once established over North America is at the root of the unusual jet position over us though.

[jethro]

Is it possible to distinguish between any impact the extra open water is having on synoptic's and the impact the quiet Solar cycle is having? If so, how?

[jethro]

It's just such a shame that time is so short to study the impacts of things like the Albedo flip and the Arctic amplification.

It just appears to me like the A.A. messed with the N.H. circulation over the winter months . This time around that lead to W.A.A. into the N.E. of the USA drying the ground there and making high heat levels there, later, more likely. once that H.P. was established the heat helps keep the H.P. intact and leads to us being on the bottom end of a very sinuous polar jet 'loop' giving us our lovely summer weather.

It is becoming ever easier to see the pressure anoms that arise in late Autumn/early winter due to the warm air rising out of the ocean across the Arctic but it takes 'teleconnections' to see the impacts later in the season.

We have other 'unfortunate links' that a warming planet has brought into play Take the beetles that have lead to widespread tree death in the areas of the Forrest fires. would those beetles have been be flourishing now if we were not seeing the planet warm and their range expanding ever northward?

The one thing i am not seeing are 'positives' that current changes are bringing us? Is this media bias??

The Beetle spread has much to do with the density of planting and the reliance and over-use of just one species of tree. Before such industrial scale timber farming, all requiring one particular kind of wood, there used to be more variety and natural breaks between stands of Pine - these breaks and different varieties of trees prevented the spread of the Beetles.

Positives of warming? Historically, populations have flourished during warmer times and with the rate that the world's population is growing, we'll need every extra inch of productive land to feed people. If warmer climes leads to longer growing seasons, that has to be a good thing. Drought may become an issue but plant breeders are working extra hard to breed varieties of feed crops which will better withstand dryer conditions. Of course it's hard to imagine that a warmer climate may lead to drought here, especially with the recent summer's high rainfall but that is what the IPCC predicted. Drought, with drought tolerant plants, will certainly be preferable to the cool wet summer we're currently in - fungal disease is flourishing in the current conditions, it will certainly lead to reduced yield and in some cases, crop failure.

[knocker]

We have other 'unfortunate links' that a warming planet has brought into play Take the beetles that have lead to widespread tree death in the areas of the Forrest fires. would those beetles have been be flourishing now if we were not seeing the planet warm and their range expanding ever northward?

One could use other examples GW.

A study of non-migtatory butterfly species across Europe found that about two-thirds of the species had shifted their range northwards and climate was the probable cause. Some butterflies are beginning to overwinter in Ireland and some are popping up in Finland and Sweden that were previously too cold.

There is also a northward drift of zooplankton in the eastern North Atlantic. Warm-water species have extended northward by more than 10 degrees of latitude with a corresponding decrease in the number of colder-water species. The zooplankton have been accompanied by fish populations.

Rising temperatures are gradually changing the northern Bering Sea from an arctic to a sub-arctic ecosystem and, in doing so, introducing the gray whale to the area. The absence of fish in its upper waters has given the region one of the richest seabed ecosystems in the world. In recent decades, temperatures have risen by around 3°C in the northernmost part of the Pacific Ocean and in the Bering Sea. Grebmeir, et al, has shown that, as the waters warm, fish are invading and the bottom dwellers are retreating further north, the fish being followed in turn by their predators, gray whales and walruses. This may mean that whales and walruses may disappear from the traditional hunting grounds of native villagers elsewhere in the Bering Sea.

[Methuselah]

One could use other examples GW.

A study of non-migtatory butterfly species across Europe found that about two-thirds of the species had shifted their range northwards and climate was the probable cause. Some butterflies are beginning to overwinter in Ireland and some are popping up in Finland and Sweden that were previously too cold.

There is also a northward drift of zooplankton in the eastern North Atlantic. Warm-water species have extended northward by more than 10 degrees of latitude with a corresponding decrease in the number of colder-water species. The zooplankton have been accompanied by fish populations.

Rising temperatures are gradually changing the northern Bering Sea from an arctic to a sub-arctic ecosystem and, in doing so, introducing the gray whale to the area. The absence of fish in its upper waters has given the region one of the richest seabed ecosystems in the world. In recent decades, temperatures have risen by around 3°C in the northernmost part of the Pacific Ocean and in the Bering Sea. Grebmeir, et al, has shown that, as the waters warm, fish are invading and the bottom dwellers are retreating further north, the fish being followed in turn by their predators, gray whales and walruses. This may mean that whales and walruses may disappear from the traditional hunting grounds of native villagers elsewhere in the Bering Sea.

Right enough, knocker. Whatever semantics/rhetoric and other 'words' used by humans may imply, Nature doesn't lie?

[BornFromTheVoid]

Latest sea ice extent graph up to the 7th. Extent currently stands at 8,507,813km2

Seems we're just approaching the point where 2007 and 2011 dart off into the record low area and 2006 and 2010 move back towards the other years, which way will we go this year?

Here are some sea ice minima that we could be looking out for passing over the next 2 weeks.

1980 7,445,124km2

1982 7,219,060km2

1983 7,286,120km2

1986 7,230,686km2

1988 7,111,049km2

1992 7,241,195km2

1996 7,216,440km2

Edited July 8, 2012 by BornFromTheVoid

[BornFromTheVoid]

Those warm SSTs in the Beaufort sea are appearing on the unisys charts now, as well as a big reduction in the -ve anomalies around the Bering sea.

Also, last month was another +ve dipole one overall. Continuing the pattern seen since April this year.

[Gray-Wolf]

Ooooh , so much off and on topic stuff to reply to?

J' I didn't know/was aware that the areas impacted with the beetle were 'farmed' areas? All the lit. seems to point to it being 'natural' Forrest's and a need to introduce stock from further south? Drought? Were not the south on a hose pipe ban until the rains came?

4, We have plenty of studies showing how the atmosphere has been impacted each year since at least 02'? The most notable focus on the changes over Barentsz/Kara and have been linked to on numerous occasions here over the past 3 years?

Nature does not lie. We may see 'outliers' like our flirtation with the 'Hummingbird moth' in 03', but that was a 'freak summer' (wasn't it?) , but the slow steady migration of other critters appears to continue (unless you are a dormouse and then we are moving you 'oop north' to save you the bother!) As knock's points out the zooplankton now pootleing around the n. Atlantic hasn't been noted there for upward of 70,000yrs (I seem to recall from the article i posted 2 years ago when our Grey whale visited the Holy land?).

Yup! BFTV, here we go!

We either have a 'different Arctic' to those years (the loss of the last of the thick ice) and so even 'average weather' will continue the melt apace or it will be totally dependant on the next 6 weeks of 'weather' as to whether we challenge the record (again) or not?

Though not a 'Wish' (as some here would try and make out of me) I do believe that things are now very different to either 07' or 2010 and so think that we will see a record (either by a small margin or by a county mile) come Sept this year.

I also think that folk will 'help' by pointing out when the A.A. takes hold again across the pole this Autumn and also help highlight those 'Weather impacts' further south so we can be 'sure' of the validity of the 'cause and effect' that we are seeing.

All in all an interesting few days past eh?

Edited July 8, 2012 by jethro
no need for the name calling.

[Gray-Wolf]

http://www.arctic.io/observations/

Do have a peep old dears (full mag. and grab and pull)

Now, you folk who had their interest piqued in 07', have you ever seen early July look like this???

No matter your 'opinion' let the visual 'facts' do the speaking and then ,most importantly, be honest with yourself.

Do you see a pack that is primed to lose 78,000 a day (as is the recent 'average') or one that will go further?

[4wd]

http://www.arctic.io/observations/

Greenland looks very white, I thought there was a picture the other day it was made to look 30% grey.