Arctic Ice: How Does It Influence Our Weather?

[Gray-Wolf]

Agreed J' What will apportioning the blame profit us? Understanding the drivers will, however, enable us to possibly mitigate impacts by reducing the forcings. A stitch in time and all that?

[jethro]

Agreed J' What will apportioning the blame profit us? Understanding the drivers will, however, enable us to possibly mitigate impacts by reducing the forcings. A stitch in time and all that?

Personally, I think it's irrelevant. Other than being involved in the insurance business, I can see little point in finding someone to blame and someone to pass the costs on to.

Moving on to a more 'on topic' point, and this is a genuine question which occurred to me when reading this thread title. In the simplest of terms weather is generated by opposing forces trying to find balance - the warm Tropics advecting air towards cold Poles. Wouldn't a warmer Arctic create less of an opposing force and thus result in less extreme weather?

[knocker]

Moving on to a more 'on topic' point, and this is a genuine question which occurred to me when reading this thread title. In the simplest of terms weather is generated by opposing forces trying to find balance - the warm Tropics advecting air towards cold Poles. Wouldn't a warmer Arctic create less of an opposing force and thus result in less extreme weather?

This any help J.

Cornell researchers warn that Arctic ice melt is setting stage for severe winters

ITHACA, N.Y. – The dramatic melt-off of Arctic sea ice due to climate change is hitting closer to home than millions of Americans might think.

That's because melting Arctic sea ice can trigger a domino effect leading to increased odds of severe winter weather outbreaks in the Northern Hemisphere's middle latitudes – think the "Snowmageddon" storm that hamstrung Washington, D.C., during February 2010.

Cornell's Charles H. Greene, professor of earth and atmospheric sciences, and Bruce C. Monger, senior research associate in the same department, detail this phenomenon in a paper published in the June issue of the journal Oceanography.

"Everyone thinks of Arctic climate change as this remote phenomenon that has little effect on our everyday lives," Greene said. "But what goes on in the Arctic remotely forces our weather patterns here."

A warmer Earth increases the melting of sea ice during summer, exposing darker ocean water to incoming sunlight. This causes increased absorption of solar radiation and excess summertime heating of the ocean – further accelerating the ice melt. The excess heat is released to the atmosphere, especially during the autumn, decreasing the temperature and atmospheric pressure gradients between the Arctic and middle latitudes.

A diminished latitudinal pressure gradient is associated with a weakening of the winds associated with the polar vortex and jet stream. Since the polar vortex normally retains the cold Arctic air masses up above the Arctic Circle, its weakening allows the cold air to invade lower latitudes.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-06/cu-cr060612.php

[East_England_Stormchaser91]

I would have though that the ever further retreat of Arctic ice would lead to extreme heatwaves becoming more of a common occurrence, with less cold temperatures being able to break the heatwaves that do occur, therefore they will likely stay prolonged. As has been stated, the Arctic is the air conditioning of the Northern Hemisphere. Without it, we would likely see more extreme events in the form of wildfires, droughts, intense storms and rainfall due to the atmosphere's capability of holding more water, the warmer it is.

I'm no expert, but just thinking about it and by what I've seen, it seems to be happening, take into account Moscow seeing an unheard of 40c during July 2010.

[knocker]

I haven't access to the whole paper but to quote.

Europe and Alaska experienced record-breaking winter storms, and the global average temperature during March 2012 was cooler than any other March since 1999.

"A lot of times people say, 'Wait a second, which is it going to be – more snow or more warming?' Well, it depends on a lot of factors, and I guess this was a really good winter demonstrating that," Greene said. "What we can expect, however, is the Arctic wildcard stacking the deck in favor of more severe winter outbreaks in the future."

[knocker]

And of course there are always complications.

COLUMBIA, Mo. – This past March was the second warmest winter month ever recorded in the Midwest, with temperatures 15 degrees above average. The only other winter month that was warmer was December of 1889, during which temperatures were 18 degrees above average. Now, MU researchers may have discovered why the weather patterns during these two winter months, separated by 123 years, were so similar. The answer could help scientists develop more accurate weather prediction models.

Tony Lupo, chair of the Department of Soil, Environment and Atmospheric Sciences in the College of Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources at MU, created computer models with global weather records and ship captains' logs to determine why these two months were unusually warm. He discovered that the preceding months were also dry and warm, as well as the previous summers, which led him to determine that both 2012 and 1889 were La Niña years.

"During a period of La Niña the sea surface temperatures across the equatorial Eastern Central Pacific Ocean are lower than normal by 3 to 6 degrees," Lupo said. "This typically directs the jet stream from the Pacific on a northeastern path over Canada. Rain storms follow the jet stream, leaving the central and south-central states dry, while blocking air from moving south into the Midwest, resulting in higher temperatures."

The discovery of the similarity between these two months, even though they are separated by 123 years, could help scientists understand the variability within climate patterns and assist them with future weather predictions. Thus, scientists could further understand how climate is changing and how variable it is becoming.

As well as being La Niña years, 2012 and 1889 also featured strong Artic Oscillations, a pattern of air pressure that wraps itself around the North Pole. During these times the air pressure is low and the oscillation traps and keeps cold air in the artic. With oscillation keeping cold air to the north, records showed a strong "ridge" over central North America. Ridges often bring record heat into an area, explaining the unusually warm winter temperatures, Lupo explained.

"The La Niña pattern has continued into the summer and will continue to affect the weather," Lupo said. "This will cause droughts and above average heat throughout the Midwest from Texas to Iowa. A new El Nino pattern could develop this fall and bring favorable weather conditions to the Midwest; however, I don't see this happening."

Lupo shared his results with fellow scientists at the Seventh International Climate Change Conference in Chicago this M

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-06/uom-tww061412.php

[Gray-Wolf]

Hi J'!

I'd imagine if we were getting full Arctic cold (minus 30's and 40's) then we would need to wonder but those 'normal' temps are now increasingly rare across most of the Arctic. Any northerly outbreaks for us come down from open water areas which do not seem to see temps beyond -15 these days? Add in the transport time over water and the temp modification this brings to the lower levels and we end up with even less potent northerly blasts.

The current 'cold-waves' over Russia and China are home grown events with Dry High's radiating heat out of the area over the long nights. Both the impacted areas appear to be having lower temps than most of the Arctic basin!!!

[BornFromTheVoid]

I think the reduced thermal gradient might result in decreased mid-latitude wind speeds overall, but I don't see how it could reduce the other extremes?

[Gray-Wolf]

http://www.newscient...rd-weather.html

I think it is becoming an ever safer bet to include ice loss as a major driver in the extremes we have , and will continue to see.

Some of the greatest impacts are seen seasonally but , I bet, behind the scenes there is an ongoing driver that is growing in size and that it is this which will 'suddenly appear' (to some minds) over the coming few years.

I'm always likening it to the collapse of the dam and firmly believe we have been seeing the cracks for a few years now. How long before there is no denying that the dam is collapsing?

Edited January 2, 2013 by Gray-Wolf

[Gray-Wolf]

http://www.theweek.co.uk/uk-news/weather/50809/extreme-rainfall-rise-climate-change-blame

When you think about it how else can the world react when you have boosted it's potential to retain heat and reduced it's ability to reflect incoming solar over a decadal time scale? In the UK we have seen a 0.7 degree rise since the start of the Ind. Rev. Does anyone think that the next 0.7 degrees will take that long to accrue? When you think of the amount of energy needed to reduce the Arctic ice volume by 50% from 1950 to 1979 and then reduce what was left by 75% from 1979 to 2012 you can glimpse what i mean?

The inertia that the planet once had is now running out and the amount of energy available to the climate system is not only increasing because it is no longer spent on melting ice to water but also because more is absorbed at the surface (where that ice/snow used to live). All of this 'free energy' is also ever more 'trapped' by the increase in global GHG's.

As with the ice melt the graph for change is convex with a slow steady beginning and then a rapid spike. We watched the ice go now watch temp generated global weirdness take off at the same rate. What would an 07' ice melt extreme look like if it was converted into an uptick in extreme weather across the Globe?

Well sit back and wait for it....I've a feeling it won't be long!

[Gray-Wolf]

As BFTV pointed out on the other thread the AO so far this winter has been at odds with the extremes of recent years. Is this due to 'Natural' forcings being powerful to over-ride what we have seen recently or was last years mighty melt enough to have caused further changes in the circulation patterns up there?

One thing I feel sure of is that it will impact Spring/Summer even if this is only the way snow melt/ice melt reacts?

With MetO going for a warmer year , globally, than last year (going into it ENSO neutral) how will we see Arctic temps respond and how will that impact circulation further south?

Again, if it is Mother N' overturning the AO then maybe she will also 'overturn' the spring/summer Jet pattern we have suffered since 07', if it is the 'extra' melt last summer then maybe the Jet pattern will be further amplified (and it's frequency reduced) bringing us a better crack at a dry summer?

Should we find it to be the latter then an amplified Jet will bring it's own consequences to the Arctic with warmer air pushed further into the basin, more frequently than we have seen of late leading to another record melt year?

Another record year would surely lead to even further extremes in northern hemisphere circulation patterns over the following 12 months?

Edited January 26, 2013 by Gray-Wolf

[Gray-Wolf]

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00524.1

More linkage to sea ice conditions and our (Eurasian) summer weather.

[Gray-Wolf]

http://www.itv.com/news/2013-04-10/met-office-investigating-arctic-link-in-record-low-temperatures/

 

More links ,and study, into the links with our 'weird Weather'. Pretty soon you'll be a bit of a flat earther to not concede record losses of ice (and all the changes this brings with albedo and energy re-distribution) impacts our world right now?

[4wd]

Looks like an opinion piece to me, trying to sound like they are on the ball and will eventually come up with a tortuous AGW related explanation..

It's amusing that the warning is now for 'cold dry winters and springs' - the exact opposite of what they were warning not very long ago at all - when we had a group of years with mild and wet winters.They have no idea, and trying to maintain that any notable weather is somehow a consequence of AGW makes them look naive. and well ... silly.

[pottyprof]

This was also forecast to happen when the sun went quiet. We can't prove if it's the sun or 'climate change' that is causing it at the moment. I'd put my money on the sun though.

[Methuselah]

If the North Sea suddenly froze over (for whatever reason) wouldn't that affect NW Europe's climate? In this instance, it's not the ultimate cause that's important (the politicians and media hacks will bicker about that indefinitely, anyway), it's the laws of thermodynamics...

 

Politicians and media hacks do not understand thermodynamics...

[Gray-Wolf]

Surely it's just a matter of weighting probabilities P.P.? What varience have we seen in the sun since 07' onward and what scale of impacts has ice loss driven since 07'(albedo flip enabling better harvesting of the suns energy and re-distribution of energy once employed all summer melting ice)?

 

I know this is an over simplification but there seems to have been a far bigger impact from ice loss on the atmospheric workings than from any varience in solar output. I know it is your 'belief' but I struggle to see things any other way than I do as ,to me, solar appears a non-starter?

[Methuselah]

I agree, Ian: the sheer amount of heat involved just cannot be put down to solar effects; which are still yet to be even detected...

[jonboy]

 

Surely it's just a matter of weighting probabilities P.P.? What varience have we seen in the sun since 07' onward and what scale of impacts has ice loss driven since 07'(albedo flip enabling better harvesting of the suns energy and re-distribution of energy once employed all summer melting ice)? I know this is an over simplification but there seems to have been a far bigger impact from ice loss on the atmospheric workings than from any varience in solar output. I know it is your 'belief' but I struggle to see things any other way than I do as ,to me, solar appears a non-starter?

 I will try and respond in more detail to this over the weekend but to say solar is a non starter to me is wrong. the output from the sun associaated with EUV etc are not immediate but have lag effects. As an example if high solar output in certain wave bands help heat the oceans in the tropics this heating won't affect the artic for many years as the ocean currents won't transport that heat overnight but over many years. In my opinion we arenow begining to see the change to cooler/colder times as a result of a quieter sun that being present now for 5/6 years.The next 2/3 years are going to be really intresting especially as we see a return to more ice in the NH

[Gray-Wolf]

  I will try and respond in more detail to this over the weekend but to say solar is a non starter to me is wrong. the output from the sun associaated with EUV etc are not immediate but have lag effects. As an example if high solar output in certain wave bands help heat the oceans in the tropics this heating won't affect the Attic for many years as the ocean currents won't transport that heat overnight but over many years. In my opinion we are now beginning to see the change to cooler/colder times as a result of a quieter sun that being present now for 5/6 years.The next 2/3 years are going to be really interesting especially as we see a return to more ice in the NH

 

I think you're not quite understanding the changed arctic? We have seen , over the past 4 years, Synoptics that used to protect ice take ice away. We have seen , via fixed buoy arrays, changes to the surface of the Arctic that preclude ice retention. In effect, the ice appears to now need as much time (over 50yrs) to regain the kind of ice that is durable enough to withstand the cyclical 'perfect storm' synoptic.

 

Many folk are looking back to 08' to guess at how the Arctic will respond to last years record melt. i would say that, even over this short span of time, 07' cannot be used as an analogue for this years melt. We now have a very different ice pack with FY ice dominating. Much of the older ice took a battering through last years melt season and so must include a portion of FY ice at it's base.

 

Last year we saw 'average weather' take 3m of ice before Aug.

 

How much 'old ice' do we have that is over 3m thick? Where is it positioned?

 

From what I've been seeing these past years we should brace ourselves for further massive melting in the basin rivaling last years record melt or even surpassing it.

 

By late June we should have a better idea of what we should expect come September.

[BornFromTheVoid]

This was also forecast to happen when the sun went quiet. We can't prove if it's the sun or 'climate change' that is causing it at the moment. I'd put my money on the sun though.

 

These studies are looking at the link over decades, not just the last 5 years, which is when the sun went quiet.

[pottyprof]

Surely it's just a matter of weighting probabilities P.P.? What varience have we seen in the sun since 07' onward and what scale of impacts has ice loss driven since 07'(albedo flip enabling better harvesting of the suns energy and re-distribution of energy once employed all summer melting ice)?

  But we have both.  Both are causing variance.  Both can cause it.  We know that a quiet sun causes cold weather.  This is obvious.  What is it about Occam's razor? Don't get me wrong on this, I admit that the processes that are under way in the Arctic will have an effect.  I just think the obvious is being overlooked. Edited April 13, 2013 by pottyprof
Flippin' BBCode

[pottyprof]

These studies are looking at the link over decades, not just the last 5 years, which is when the sun went quiet.

But we have some basic records from the UK that demonstrate that bitter cold is caused by a quiet sun, at least in this part of the world. Edited April 13, 2013 by pottyprof

[BornFromTheVoid]

But we have some basic records from the UK that demonstrate that bitter cold is caused by a quiet sun, at least in this part of the world.

 

But what of the mechanism? UV is being put out there as the cause, but what are UV stats like during the LIA, how are they at the moment?

 

The recent studies linking Arctic changes have found the correlations, not just in recent years, but spanning decades. These links are being found by multiple lines of research, using different techniques and from numerous institutes across the globe. It seems like the consensus is building. While with the sun,things seem rather stagnant.

 

I do think both the sun and changes to sea ice/snow cover are influencing circulation patterns though. But in my own opinion, the changes on the surface are beginning to play a dominating role.

[Methuselah]

  But we have both.  Both are causing variance.  Both can cause it.  We know that a quiet sun causes cold weather.  This is obvious.  What is it about Occam's razor? Don't get me wrong on this, I admit that the processes that are under way in the Arctic will have an effect.  I just think the obvious is being overlooked.

But has anyone actually observed any reduction in energy coming from the sun? Or is that just expectation, at this point?