What Do You Think The 2012 Sea Ice Extent Minimum Will Be?

[BornFromTheVoid]

Hopefully I've done this correctly!

The idea is simple, just select the answer that you think will be closest to the sea ice minimum this year. If ye wouldn't mind, a brief line or 2 with the reasoning behind your estimate in the comments section might be useful.

Seen as there were no objections in the Arctic thread, I'll presume everyone is ok with using the IJIS data.

I think the arcus site uses the NSIDC data for their estimates, but the minima on both the NSIDC and IJIS have been very close to eachother the last few years so the IJIS data should be fine.

This thread isn't meant for taking away discussion from the main sea ice thread, so try to avoid too much discussion here!

The 2007 minimum extent was ~4,250,000km2

The average IJIS data (2003-2011) minimum is ~5,160,000km2

[BornFromTheVoid]

My vote was for 4,000,000 - 4,200,000km2, a new record minimum. This is based on there being so much more open water in the Arctic this year than the last few, the prevalence of the dipole pattern so far this summer and also based on how low last year got without needing 2007-like conditions.

Most of that hints at a very fragile pack, that would likely need favourable atmospheric conditions just to reach the average of the last 9 years, and with the dipole so strong this melt season so far, favourable conditions don't appear too likely.

[Gray-Wolf]

My Vote (3.6-3.8 ) reflects my concerns for the state of the basin and the thin ice in it. We still have sections of what I would consider 'easy Ice' to go so we can drop around 1/2 a million before we properly start on the basin ice.

Drift plots (and pole cam 1) show the ice that spent winter over the pole is on the move toward Fram so the most concentrated ice is entering into ever warmer climes. The ice trying to take it's place over the pole is already fragmented and so has been soaking up heat already this season. The ice behind this (out toward Bering Straights) I believe is going to melt out totally. If this happen over the next 4 weeks the some of that warm water will also be nibbling at the pack drifting poleward.

I also am begging to believe that the basin is also creating it's own weather and this adds into the melt by producing clear skies over swathes of the basin and drifting ice faster toward Fram.

[Iceberg]

I've gone for one below you GW, I've never seen the ice as weak as this and unless we get a change mid summer we could see a shock to the system.

[Gray-Wolf]

Believe it or not Ice I was being a conservative as I could!!!

I do not know just how the poor state of the ice will play into the absorbing of heat which will go into the later stages of melt. If we have pancakes of 10cm thick ice at Summers end then 2 days ,earlier on in the season, could have been under sun and imparted enough to finish that ice , or under cloud and will leave it as 'ice cover'. I do think we will have a lot of wafer thin ice come re-freeze and it is this ice that could give us a 1/2 million skew either way.

I have not fully accounted for the drift out of ice and keep being drawn back to the 'ice age' plots before melt season. Are you seeing just how much of the older ice is being taken and that ,this time, F.Y. ice being left in-situ?

No matter the end figure we will be in a heck of a state for next year with any 'rebound' in ice age from 07' totally wiped out and more F.Y. ice than ever before.

The 'Beaufort Gyre' programme (buoys put in last year) show heat from a few m down to 150m down. This surely will mess with reform once it is mixed into the surface layer when the ice in the Gyre retreats?

It would appear that event though vast amounts of summers heat is lost back into the atmosphere in autumn so much more is held in the surface waters.

We should have known after last years Bering/Beaufort 'hurricane' pushed swells under the new pack which lead to further basal melting well into November?

Anyhow ,lets wait 'till mid Aug and see how we are doing?

[BornFromTheVoid]

Seems only the pessimists and alarmists are guessing so far with nobody expecting better than lowest 3 on record, oh well.

[laserguy]

Seems only the pessimists and alarmists are guessing so far with nobody expecting better than lowest 3 on record, oh well.

Maybe because only those could care less? Are we all going to die or something,or will a Top 3 entry somehow give vindication to their daft CO2 fantasies? I'll go for 0 km2.

[BornFromTheVoid]

Tis just a poll LG, no need for the dramatics!

[Gray-Wolf]

Maybe because only those could care less? Are we all going to die or something,or will a Top 3 entry somehow give vindication to their daft CO2 fantasies? I'll go for 0 km2.

C'mon L.G.!

Even though CO2 is increasing faster than the B.A.U. worse case scenarios in TAR4 is the ice loss (mass) keeping pace with it or is it far in excess of it?

I would suggest that the Arctic is now locked into a cycle that is self fuelling and so well outside anything us puny humans could achieve on our own?

As such it is just another expression of mother Nature seeking to find a better point of 'balance' for the new energy budget across the region (since the 'Albedo Flip'?)

Just look at 'snow loss' alone for a moment and calculate a ball park figure for the amount of 'extra heat' this put into the system for June. I have seen figures suggesting that , for this 1 month alone, it is in excess of 4 times the 'extra energy' AGW is supposed to accrue over a year due to GHG increases. Remember that is just 1 month of snow cover reduction (when compared to the 79-2000 snow cover figures).

So please do feel free to show your understanding of how the Arctic sea ice has changed and how todays 'novel forcings' will play out over this melt season.

[laserguy]

I would suggest that the Arctic is now locked into a cycle that is self fuelling and so well outside anything us puny humans could achieve on our own?

Well you've changed your tune! 'Bout time,too. Still the question remains; so what?

[Devonian]

Well you've changed your tune! 'Bout time,too. Still the question remains; so what?

All the worlds great painting are just a surface and paint.

All the worlds great books are just words.

All the worlds great tunes are just noise.

The Arctic sea ice is just water and salt.

[Methuselah]

I've plumped for 3.8 - 4.0 million. But, with synoptics being as they are, I may be being a tad optimistic. I do hope not!

[Gray-Wolf]

And then you wonder why I have that 'Hopi' word as my sig.......

IPCC prediction for the 2012 sea ice extent min 6.5 ( http://www.realclima...es/seaice10.jpg )

WUWT latest prediction for min extent 4.55 ( http://wattsupwithth...itted-to-arcus/ )

[BornFromTheVoid]

Seeing as just 14 people voted, we probably wouldn't get enough votes for the next poll to contribute to the ARCUS outlook,

I'm guessing more would participate if the votes were private?

Any suggestions?

[Gray-Wolf]

Though a shame I think you might be right BFTV?

[BornFromTheVoid]

Perhaps I'll try private voting on the next one, see how it goes. I just thought with the voting open, people might give a genuine prediction, rather than picking the most extreme so as to skew the results in their direction.

[jethro]

Perhaps I'll try private voting on the next one, see how it goes. I just thought with the voting open, people might give a genuine prediction, rather than picking the most extreme so as to skew the results in their direction.

You could only skew the results if you had more than one vote.

[BornFromTheVoid]

You could only skew the results if you had more than one vote.

I just mean that they might vote to a minimum of 6,000,000 when they actually think it will be 5,000,000, just so the average will be higher, or likewise with voting extra low.

[Gray-Wolf]

I think you have seen this type of voting behaviour in past polls. Sadly it normally seems (to me) that you do get a grouping of fantastic high values? I have always taken this as some odd 'protest vote' by folk upset by the poles unwillingness to 'recover' along with their own personal predictions.

We also see the odd 'low' punt but these have always been singles and not groups?

As such we have seen an interesting result in the 'exclusion of the protest voters'?

[Geordiesnow]

Does it really matter whats the result of this poll is? People have got their own opinion and if they want to vote higher/lower than what they REALLY think then thats upto them surely not? Its kinda sad when you think about it but no matter what the results of this poll is, its not going to alter the fact that sea ice will once again will be below average and barring a miracle, it will be near or below the 2007 extent figure.

[BornFromTheVoid]

Does it really matter whats the result of this poll is? People have got their own opinion and if they want to vote higher/lower than what they REALLY think then thats upto them surely not? Its kinda sad when you think about it but no matter what the results of this poll is, its not going to alter the fact that sea ice will once again will be below average and barring a miracle, it will be near or below the 2007 extent figure.

Of course, the poll result doesn't matter really. The original idea for setting up the poll, was that if we got enough votes we could maybe try and contribute it too the ARCUS September sea ice outlook, like WUWT did. Twould be good publicity for netweather if nothing else!

That's why I thought an open poll would be better, so people would be more likely to try and give their honest prediction, rather than what they hoped or whatever else.

[jethro]

Is there really no topic in this section that cannot run smoothly without descending to bickering?

Either get a grip or take a break.

[BornFromTheVoid]

Did I miss something? Who are you referring to?

[jethro]

Turn your attention elsewhere for five minutes and you miss all the action...

Just trying to keep your poll running as a poll and not let it descend into a bickering match.

[cooling climate]

No record melt this year I'm afraid. 5 to 5.2 million cheers.