Arctic Ice Discussion (The Melt)

[cheeky_monkey]

Yes it was.

All the info can be found by checking out the peer reviewed studies of Igor Polyakov. He's a well respected scientist, his work is accepted and quoted by the IPCC, he is not, and cannot be claimed to be a sceptic of AGW.

http://www.iarc.uaf.edu/people/igor

An excerpt of this paper http://www2.gi.alaska.edu/~bhatt/publications/polyakov.etal.2003a.pdf

For example, the Arctic temperature was higher in the 1930s–40s than in recent decades, and hence a trend calculated for the period 1920 to the present actually shows cooling.

This was published in 2003, clearly the info from years since then may change the final figures and counter the cooling trend, but the historical facts remain the same.

no it doesnt according to those papers the artic is 1c warmer now than in 1920...shows it warmed from 1920 - 50 then cooled up to 1980s then warmed agained up to and including now.

[BornFromTheVoid]

A slightly more up to date temperature graph

[jethro]

no it doesnt according to those papers the artic is 1c warmer now than in 1920...shows it warmed from 1920 - 50 then cooled up to 1980s then warmed agained up to and including now.

Exactly. This is the point I made earlier (with the addition of the caveat that the data was only until 2003, so later years obviously altered the cooling conclusion).

The study GW linked to compares today with a time period of the 1950's to the late 1970's. The time period chosen for comparison is a time when the Arctic was naturally cooler and the ice was increasing. If they had used the earlier period of 1920's through to 1950 when the Arctic was warmer, with less ice then it would have made the new study a more direct and therefore more valid comparison.

Compare a warm period to another warm period. Don't compare a cold period to a warm period - unless that is you want to make your study and the measured impacts overly dramatic. Leave showbiz to showbiz, science shouldn't tread the drama path.

[BornFromTheVoid]

From the paper in question, seeing as nobody is referring to why they used the base period they did.

To estimate the internal variability of Arctic sea-ice

extent for modern conditions, we use sea-ice data from

reconnaissance flights and ship observations that are collected

in the HadISST dataset [Rayner et al., 2003; Met

Office Hadley Centre, 2006]. While this record provides

sea-ice data from 1880 onwards, we here focus on the period

1953–1978 (“pre-satellite record†in Figure 1). We chose this

reference period for the following reasons (see auxiliary

material for details).1

[6] First, the data within the HadISST record that predate

1953 are considered less reliable than those from 1953

onward [Meier et al., 2007].

[7] Second, from 1979 onwards the HadISST data set is

primarily based on satellite observations. We find across the

1978/1979 boundary an unusually large increase in sea-ice

extent in March and an unusually large decrease in sea-ice

extent in September (Figures 1b and 1d). This indicates a

possible inconsistency in the data set across this boundary.

[8] Third, since there is no significant trend in sea-ice

extent during the period 1953–1978 in the HadISST data,

we can compare this time period with model simulations

of internal variability. Doing so, we find good agreement

between the internal variability of sea-ice extent as simulated

by a 500-year long model simulation of the Max-Planck-

Institutes’ Earth System Model ECHAM5/MPIOM (see

Figure 2a and auxiliary material for details).

[9] Fourth, considering the entire HadISST record from

1880 until 1978, the lowest sea ice extent for all months but

June fall within the period 1953–1978. Hence, the sea-ice

state during that time is closer to the sea-ice extent during

the satellite record than the earlier data within the HadISST

record, which minimizes a possibly distorting impact of landmass

distribution on our analysis [cf. Eisenman, 2010].

Some uncertainty nevertheless remains in our estimate

of internal variability from the rather short pre-satellite record

during the period 1953–1978. Therefore, we employ a

number of additional measures to ensure that we are very

conservative in possibly rejecting the null hypothesis that

internal variability as displayed by the pre-satellite record can

explain the sea-ice evolution from 1979 until 2010. For this

latter period, we use satellite observations collected in the

NSIDC Sea Ice Index [Fetterer et al., 2002, 2010] (“satellite

NSIDC record†in Figure 1). We use the NSIDC record rather

than the HadISST record from 1979 onwards because the

NSIDC record provides a more consistent interpretation of

the satellite period [Meier et al., 2007].

[cheeky_monkey]

A slightly more up to date temperature graph

According to this the arctic is more than degree warmer now than at any time in the last 130 years.

[Gray-Wolf]

"And what do you call a Denier who Denies being a Denier anyway?"

(sorry Apocalypse now but I couldn't resist)

I feel that it is one thing to 'question the science' (as we all ought) but wholly another to dismiss the expertise of the Authors on a 'skim' over the paper (and then to post such and not just keep it inside???)

Anyhow, my prediction for extent levels rivaling 07's by late May looks pretty good right now no?

If I am proved correct on 'late infill ice' across the Basin then the remaining ice will have open water to deal with for far longer than we have become used to seeing in the 'new Arctic'?

Atmospherics? With a well broken pack then current and wind transport will also be up on last year.

All in all I feel the pack is set for a serious beating over the coming summer months (before we look at the impacts of Atlantic ingress via Fram?)

The sooner some folk 'Embrace' the notion of the 'new Arctic' the sooner they can explore it's new and novel workings (bereft of thick ,stabilising paleocryistic ice).

Methane. Another novel aspect of our 'new Arctic' either poor timing or human forcing? it matters not! what matters is the impermeable 'cap' over the submerged permafrosts is now breached and new features (sculpted by escaping methane) seem to be expanding at an alarming rate.

[BornFromTheVoid]

According to this the arctic is more than degree warmer now than at any time in the last 130 years.

You can look at the ncep reanalysis data here http://www.esrl.noaa.../timeseries1.pl

I just downloaded the monthly temperature mean for north of 60N and made this graph from it

A quick review of the April conditions

Sea Level Pressure Anomaly

We can see a return of the Arctic Dipole Anomaly like pattern here, with the +ve anomaly over the Canadian side. While the anomaly pattern isn't a typical dipole pattern, the pressure gradient as can be seen in the SLP mean chart is conducive to increased winds through Fram.

Sea Level Pressure Mean

Wind Vector Anomaly

The +ve wind anomalies through Fram show the impacts of the return to the Dipole.

925hPa Temperature Anomaly

The temperature anomaly seems closely related to the air pressure pattern

Based on my own dipole index, April came in at 19.0, compared to a long term mean of 10.6C. Here's a graph of April figures from 1948 to present.

[stewfox]

NSIDC April Report

http://nsidc.org/arc...xtent-in-april/

Highest extent since 2001, and just below average.

Yes still very much average. Open question can they really compare the ice thickness now cf 1982 etc The suggestion is its thinner ice therefore we will see a more rapid melt May/June time will tell.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/arctic.sea.ice.interactive.html

[BornFromTheVoid]

Yes still very much average. Open question can they really compare the ice thickness now cf 1982 etc The suggestion is its thinner ice therefore we will see a more rapid melt May/June time will tell.

http://arctic.atmos....nteractive.html

The Cryosphere Today graph hasn't updated for a while and is now a week behind. The NSIDC graph show the SIE moving quickly away from average

As for their claim about the thickness, I'd say rather than them using any models or comparisons with other years, they based it on the fact that the SIE went from near record lowest on average at the end of February to nearly average in April, so most of that extra growth occurred in a short time at the end of winter and so wouldn't have had long enough to gain much thickness. Predictions of a rapid melt in May seem justified so far based on the graph above, though we have most of the month to go so things can still change.

[picog]

Does anyone know if the NOAA is doing the North Pole webcam this year? It's generally set up by now. I can't see anything on their site, but I might be looking in the wrong place.

[songster]

Cameras are up, but the feeds aren't yet grabbing images from them. Their main homepage is here:

http://psc.apl.washington.edu/northpole/

... which has links to the pages for each camera

http://psc.apl.washington.edu/northpole/NPEO2012/webcam1.html

http://psc.apl.washington.edu/northpole/NPEO2012/webcam2.html

... from which you can get to the archives

http://psc.apl.washington.edu/northpole/NPEO2012/WEBCAM1/ARCHIVE/

http://psc.apl.washington.edu/northpole/NPEO2012/WEBCAM2/ARCHIVE/

... which has the actual latest pictures for each

http://psc.apl.washington.edu/northpole/NPEO2012/WEBCAM1/ARCHIVE/npeo_cam1_20120508100338.jpg (as of 8th May)

http://psc.apl.washington.edu/northpole/NPEO2012/WEBCAM2/ARCHIVE/npeo_cam2_20120508123257.jpg (as of 8th May)

Camera 2 seems to be slightly damaged electronically, with some imaging artefacts and loss.

[BornFromTheVoid]

SIE loss has moved back to a little less than average, allowing the 2012 line to move closer to the NSIDC long term mean.

Conditions have been quite favourable recently, but this looks like changing significantly in the next week with a strong +ve dipole pattern setting up and some very mild air entering the Arctic.

At the moment, we have a strong Greenland high, extending up into the Arctic, setting up the +ve dipole with LP along the Eurasian coastline. Temperatures are quite warm around the south of Hudson Bay and in the Beaufort sea, but generally not too bad.

Ahead to t48, and the dipole pattern is becoming much more clear. This is beginning to drag some very mild air towards the Bering strait and may begin increasing the sea ice export through the Fram strait significantly. Upper temperatures across the Arctic basin though remain ok.

Four days out, the dipole pattern remains, pulling milder air is getting pulled up into the Chukchi, Bering East Siberian and Beaufort sea. Mild air is also making it's way through Scandinavia into the Barents and Kara sea. Hudson Bay is back in cooler air though.

By t144, we still have the dipole pattern in place, so continued sea ice export from this and ever more milder air being pulled up from the pacific. Widespread uppers of close to or above 0C around the Bering strait area. Meanwhile, some very warm air with upper >5C gets pulled into the Kara sea along with southerly winds and low pressure. The Baffin sea is warming up very much aso, with upper generally around 0C and mild air again returns to the south of Hudson bay. If this set up occurs as forecast, a period of very high melt rates can be expected

And finally, an animation of 850hPa temps, all from May 14th 0z from 2007-2012

[picog]

Cameras are up, but the feeds aren't yet grabbing images from them. Their main homepage is here:

http://psc.apl.washi....edu/northpole/

... which has links to the pages for each camera

http://psc.apl.washi...12/webcam1.html

http://psc.apl.washi...12/webcam2.html

... from which you can get to the archives

http://psc.apl.washi...EBCAM1/ARCHIVE/

http://psc.apl.washi...EBCAM2/ARCHIVE/

... which has the actual latest pictures for each

http://psc.apl.washi...20508100338.jpg (as of 8th May)

http://psc.apl.washi...20508123257.jpg (as of 8th May)

Camera 2 seems to be slightly damaged electronically, with some imaging artefacts and loss.

Thanks Songster.

[BornFromTheVoid]

A very large area of open water presently across the Beaufort sea coast and along the Arctic Basin/Canadian Archipelago boundary.

http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/imagery/subsets/?mosaic=Arctic.2012135.terra.4km

[Gray-Wolf]

I believe that this strip peeled off the Alaskan North slope coast over 3 weeks ago? It also messed up the ice so plenty of it is smashed into quite small fragments. Some of the movement seemed to start when we had the flow out into the Bering sea plumping up extent for a while, now we see the cost of such 'export'

A look along the North Greenland/C.A. coasts shows similar 'slabbing' of the ice as wind /current drives it toward Fram.

The thinner 'modern pack' does not seem to be any obstacle to the ice 'flowing' and you can start to see flow patterns across areas where export is occurring. The 'cracks are then glazed over with late season F.Y. ice which has no time to gain thickness/desalinate before melt season arrives. By late June we should have a lot of 'dark' between floes.

[BornFromTheVoid]

I believe that this strip peeled off the Alaskan North slope coast over 3 weeks ago? It also messed up the ice so plenty of it is smashed into quite small fragments. Some of the movement seemed to start when we had the flow out into the Bering sea plumping up extent for a while, now we see the cost of such 'export'

A look along the North Greenland/C.A. coasts shows similar 'slabbing' of the ice as wind /current drives it toward Fram.

The thinner 'modern pack' does not seem to be any obstacle to the ice 'flowing' and you can start to see flow patterns across areas where export is occurring. The 'cracks are then glazed over with late season F.Y. ice which has no time to gain thickness/desalinate before melt season arrives. By late June we should have a lot of 'dark' between floes.

It was always cold enough for a thin layer of ice to form, this is the first time it's been just open water, as there have been some mild temperatures around the Beaufort sea lately. Along the Greenland and CA coast, the crack has also been there for weeks. If you use images from the area over the last few weeks to create an animation, you can see that it's mostly the Beaufort Gyre in effect.

On yesterdays MODIS images there is also a lot of open water just after the Nares strait and in the Kara sea.

The pattern so far this month has been quite neutral, more of a -ve AO than any dipole it seems

[Richie V]

Anyone know whats happening with Cryosphere Today, long overdue an update?

EDIT: site now updated lol

Edited May 16, 2012 by Richie V

[BornFromTheVoid]

Anyone know whats happening with Cryosphere Today, long overdue an update?

EDIT: site now updated lol

Fantastic, I've been waiting for CT to update for ages!

They've now updated all the regional sea ice area graphs to include the long term data, which is interesting to have a look through.

After a quick scan through we can clearly sea that the Bering sea had the highest sea ice area on record this year. Conversely, both Kara and Barents seas had the lowest area on record, with this seemingly the first year that the Kara sea has not completely frozen over. Also, the Laptev sea had it's largest negative anomaly on record just before the new year.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/

[keithlucky]

"Experts [who?] though reported that much of the ice cover was thin, indeed since the end of April ice extent has fallen sharply."

There was an error in the sat readings recently which showed a massive drop but has since been fixed. Current ice (updated 15/5) still showing in the average region for 1979-2006.

http://arctic-roos.org/observations/satellite-data/sea-ice/observation_images/ssmi1_ice_ext.png

Antarctica is slightly above average levels.

http://weatherdem.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/s_stddev_timeseries_20120514.png

[stewfox]

"Experts [who?] though reported that much of the ice cover was thin, indeed since the end of April ice extent has fallen sharply."

There was an error in the sat readings recently which showed a massive drop but has since been fixed. Current ice (updated 15/5) still showing in the average region for 1979-2006.

http://arctic-roos.o...mi1_ice_ext.png

Antarctica is slightly above average levels.

http://weatherdem.fi...es_20120514.png

About 1,000,000kms2 above 2008 for the Artic and as you say a bit above average for Antartica.

I think we can see the 2007 suggestions of an ice free artic by summer 2013 are a bit OTT

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7139797.stm

Edited May 17, 2012 by stewfox

[BornFromTheVoid]

"Experts [who?] though reported that much of the ice cover was thin, indeed since the end of April ice extent has fallen sharply."

There was an error in the sat readings recently which showed a massive drop but has since been fixed. Current ice (updated 15/5) still showing in the average region for 1979-2006.

http://arctic-roos.o...mi1_ice_ext.png

Antarctica is slightly above average levels.

http://weatherdem.fi...es_20120514.png

Can you show the source for what you're quoting Keith?

About 1,000,000kms2 above 2008 for the Artic and as you say a bit above average for Antartica.

I think we can see the 2007 suggestions of an ice free artic by summer 2013 are a bit OTT

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7139797.stm

Yep, that particular study got it wrong. In the opposite way that folk like Joe B got it wrong

[BornFromTheVoid]

Seen has keithlucky didn't have time to post the source of his copy and paste job, here it is http://climaterealis...dex.php?id=9631

Taken from the comments, also stating satellite errors without a source. So if anyone has any info on these satellite errors, I'd appreciate a link!

Anyway, the IJIS page is back up an running with new style graphs, so daily extent updates have returned.

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

Both Cryosphere Today and IJIS are showing rapid drops over the last few days, but more so on CT. Losses of over 150,000km2 for the last 2 days available on CT (up to the May 14th), with losses averaging around 125,000km2 on IJIS for the last 4 days.

[4wd]

Yep, that particular study got it wrong. In the opposite way that folk like Joe B got it wrong

You can hardly compare Joe B's throwaway comments on a weather blog with the 'Professors' who made a major blooper with that prediction - which was parroted by the BBC and more as imminent total meltdown.

Like plenty more they were far too keen to be pinning everything on AGW and make amateurish errors by assuming a short term change extrapolated is the most likely outcome.

The result being another set of predictions which can be pointed out as an example of never ending exagerration on this subject.

See what I did there

Edited May 18, 2012 by 4wd

[BornFromTheVoid]

You can hardly compare Joe B's throwaway comments on a weather blog with the 'Professors' who made a major blooper with that prediction - which was parroted by the BBC and more as imminent total meltdown.

Like plenty more they were far too keen to be pinning everything on AGW and make amateurish errors by assuming a short term change extrapolated is the most likely outcome.

The result being another set of predictions which can be pointed out as an example of never ending exagerration on this subject.

See what I did there

The study in the BBC link was done before 2007, so while not a knee jerk reaction, was still wrong. As for Joe B, well so many people follow his sea ice predictions which he is always so confident about and he enjoys calling conspiracy and criticising other groups, so as far as public opinion he holds more sway than a single erroneous study.

The outlier predictions shouldn't be taken representative of the consensus opinion, as seems to often happen

Here is Joe B's prediction for last year

[Gray-Wolf]

http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm

Didn't know this was back!

Very different to the Roos 15% level isn't it?