Please support this Forum and Neven's Blog

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - gerontocrat

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9
1
Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: Greenland 2017 melt season
« on: July 20, 2017, 04:13:55 PM »
Forgot to post that https://nsidc.org/greenland-today/ on July 10 has a discussion on the melting season to June 30. Confirms that melting has been really slow, and last winter saw circa 150 gigatonne of mass gain more than usual.

Also says that the question of whether 2017 sees a net mass gain or loss for the Greenland ice sheet will be looked at later in the year. (On the DMI sight a mass gain looks more likely every day).

2
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: July 19, 2017, 03:40:20 PM »
Have you taken into consideration how there has not been any growth to speak of in 2017? There has not been one month of 'normal' ice since about mid September 2016. So if 2017 would have to pick up in being cold enough for new ice, it sure is taking long..
Last years October figure was a consequence of an exceptional decline in the September Ice in the Antarctic and an exceptionally low rate of growth in the Arctic in October.  I expect both areas to be more normal this year with the likely extent reaching about 25 million in October.  Not as high as previous years but higher than the low of 2016. which after all followed on the end of a long and virulent El Nino with global sea temperatures well above previous records.

So far Antarctic Sea Ice is failing to oblige by returning to normal. Indeed, if refreezing from now to max is about average, a max of around 18 to 18.5 million km2 seems likely (Jaxa data). Assuming an Arctic (jaxa) minimum of around 4 to 4.5 million km2 gives a total of 18 to 19 million km2. It is therefore quite possible that global sea ice extent may continue to decline for the time being.

3
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: July 19, 2017, 03:04:15 PM »
Despite the admittedly impressive 7 century+ breaks in the last 8 days, extent loss from maximum extent to July 18 is still 4 percent LESS than the average for the last 10 years. Also by this time, on average just over two-thirds of total extent loss (max to min) has occurred. If and only if this above average melt rate continues for a while longer, 2nd lowest extent is possible.

4
Antarctica / Re: Sea Ice Extent around Antarctica
« on: July 17, 2017, 03:14:01 PM »
Antarctic Sea Ice Extent once again lowest in the satellite record.

5
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: July 17, 2017, 02:19:20 PM »
As I expected, the trend is now showing early signs of a slower decrease rate. The synoptic configuration for the next 7-10 days is definitely not bad for the ice. Yet, if confirmed by the next few runs, it would lead in my opinion to a further flattening of the curve. The maps are quite interesting indeed: persistence of LP systems in the absence of too big gradients. In other terms, conditions conductive to ice scattering and preservation due to cloudy skies, some precipitations and no inflow of warm winds from lower latitudes.

This is even more relevant in consideration of the fact that this is a key moment of the melting season and "fresh" conditions now would probably determine the outcome of the whole melting season.
The chaps on the 2017 melting season thread have a totally contrary view on the way things are going. I also have looked at various weather sites and have seen nothing to tell me that climatic conditions are going to change soon to promote increased melting. This is such a contrast to last winter / spring with the jet stream dragging vast plumes of warm air into the high arctic and then sending vast plumes of freezing air down south.

6
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: July 16, 2017, 04:10:21 PM »
I looked at what 5 consecutive days of century + breaks did to my simple projections. The answer : not a lot. Simply put, the century+ days compensated for the previous few days of well below average extent loss.

The average for the last 10 years suggests that 65% of the total extent loss is done, just 35% to go. By the end of July average extent loss per day starts to decline significantly. So while a modest uptick in melting will still be sufficient to produce a second-lowest minimum, records are getting further out of reach (whereupon the ice just faded away).


8
Science / Re: "climate porn" vs. "not alarmed enough"
« on: July 15, 2017, 02:44:49 PM »
- "so how soon indeed?" to which I replied "it's not accurate science but certainly your children and mine are screwed". So it served its purpose after a fashion.
I rather think that anyone under 50 is going to have a lot of grief. After all, 25 years from now takes us (but not me, too old) into the 2040's. Large scale world-wide climate refugee problems, (sea level rise, droughts, floods, soil degradation, famine .......).

On bad days I think it is more likely that the 2030's may be the beginning of interesting times.

9
Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: Greenland 2017 melt season
« on: July 15, 2017, 02:25:49 PM »
"The Dog That Did Not Bark" continues not to bark. Greenland staying cool and will do for at least a few days more according to cci-reanalyzer. Looking more possible that in the DMI year Sept 1 2016 to Aug 30th 2017 surface mass balance may increase by around 200 gigatonne more than the 30 year average (and even more compared with recent years?) Impact on current sea level rise?

10
Antarctic Sea Ice extent has been lowest, 2nd lowest or 3rd lowest for 250 days. Currently 2nd lowest (from NSIDC Charctic). Herewith a small amount of data culled from JAXA.

11
The rest / Re: Russiagate
« on: July 13, 2017, 01:18:10 PM »
When considering Trump and the Russian Federation and Vladimir Putin in particular, one needs to take account of the Slavic temperament.

Here is " A VERY RUSSIAN CHARLIE BROWN "

12
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: July 13, 2017, 12:52:23 PM »
I don't know about double and triple century breaks, but a series of (single) century breaks could be in the making given the current weather forecast.

is the ijis data daily or is is one of these five day running mean finangles. interested in my pork pie prospects here! A man has to look to his food stock futures in this uncertain modern world! ;D

I believe JAXA is daily measurement, i.e. totally raw data. The two century + breaks on July 11 and 12 have barely made any difference to the projections in my spreadsheet. The amazing late melt of 2012 resulted in a melt from July 12 to minimum of just 21% above the 2007-16 average, insufficient to produce a new record low.

13
Policy and solutions / Re: If not Capitalism... then What? And, How?
« on: July 12, 2017, 12:10:56 PM »
From the UK Guardian newspaper

Threats, bullying, lawsuits: tobacco industry's dirty war for the African market
Revealed: In pursuit of growth in Africa, British American Tobacco and others use intimidatory tactics to attempt to suppress health warnings and regulation

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/12/big-tobacco-dirty-war-africa-market

And so it goes on.

14
Policy and solutions / Re: If not Capitalism... then What? And, How?
« on: July 12, 2017, 11:49:15 AM »
Because farming has nothing to do with land??  :o
I believe about 40% of the world's food supply depends on bees and other insects for pollination. Pesticides are a threat and there is a huge debate about Neonicotinoids, which work as an insecticide by blocking specific neural pathways in insects’ central nervous systems, causing disorientation, inability to feed and death. (if you want to depress yourself google it).

Europe wants to ban them. The UK (and the USA?) do not.

This is just one example of how extremely powerful industrial companies will fight to the (our?) death to keep producing these nasties.

15
Policy and solutions / Re: If not Capitalism... then What? And, How?
« on: July 11, 2017, 12:48:20 PM »
Businesses do not get to depreciate land.  Only "improvements" - buildings, utility connections, parking lots, etc.

Any land appreciation gets taxed at time of sale.
It has been an accounting standard (assumption) for hundreds (yes, hundreds) of years that land cannot depreciate in value. This is nonsense. In the old industrial city where I live there are many abandoned industrial sites that have negative value due to many years of toxic pollution buried in the ground.
I am sure it is the same in the rust belts of the USA. Make and Take profits, pollute and abandon.

16
Policy and solutions / Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« on: July 11, 2017, 12:39:41 PM »
Good article from Bloomberg on how the oil and gas industry see the future of oil and gas. I hope they are wrong in assuming demand will peak at least 25 years from now. If they are right we are toast.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-11/remember-peak-oil-demand-may-top-out-before-supply-does

17
Policy and solutions / Re: Batteries: Today's Energy Solution
« on: July 11, 2017, 12:12:37 PM »
In Ontario we gave periods when, for whatever reason, we have large amounts of electricity that we pay outrageous rates to dispose of. Is present battery storage such that it could sop up these temporary spikes for later release?
Terry
Perhaps it is not in the financial interests of the electrical generation and distribution industry in Ontario to design a smart grid and optimise energy use.?

I read somewhere that in Texas (of all places!) in 2015 17% of wind energy capacity was wasted - this was reduced to 1% in 2016. Smart grid, redesign of interconnectors etc.

18
Consequences / Re: Population: Public Enemy No. 1
« on: July 11, 2017, 12:03:36 PM »
The 6th Extinction.

To add to the gloom, when the paper says "In the 177 mammals for which we have detailed data, all have lost 30% or more of their geographic ranges ", one should also remember that that implies all the life forms in the food chain on which those mammals depend may also have lost 30% or more of their geographic ranges.

ps: Population is not Public Enemy No. 1, homo sapiens is.

pps: We are in Joni Mitchell territory, and have been for a long time (Big Yellow Taxi).

They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot
With a pink hotel, a boutique
And a swinging hot spot
Don't it always seem to go   
That you don't know what you've got
'Till it's gone
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot

They took all the trees
And put them in a tree museum
And they charged all the people
A dollar and a half to see 'em
Don't it always seem to go
That you don't know what you've got
'Till it's gone
They paved paradise
And they put up a parking lot

Hey farmer farmer
Put away that D.D.T. now
Give me spots on my apples
But leave me the birds and the bees
Please
Don't it always seem to go
That you don't know what you've got
'Till it's gone
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot

19
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: July 11, 2017, 11:37:42 AM »
There is a good chance this year will not see any SIE records, but hold the Champagne corks.
Consider: Oren's extrapolation of PIOMAS's daily numbers. It looks like a very strong possum-bility that this year's volume will come close or below those of 2012 as the melt season ends.
First thought might be that such a thing is not a big deal, but couple that with a higher than expected SIE, and voila, you have a super abundance of thin ice going into freezing season. If the upcoming season proves to be anything like the last, the scenario is the perfect setup for disaster. I really don't think that the individuals that keep pointing to the SIE and the rate it is dropping, have thought this out very well.

P.S. Don't forget, the CAA will probably be open again, and there may be trouble getting some of this loose ice to stick and not flow on through. The weather may get a little more unsettled by then.

As an individual pointing at Jaxa SIE measurements constantly I would agree that a scenario of high SIE coupled with very low volume obviously results in a very high area of thin ice going into fall and winter 2017-2018. (2012 saw of lot of area/extent reduction at the end of the melting season and voila, multo freezing winter 2012-2013). I assume that a great deal of thin ice will tend to hold in ocean heat content and inhibit ice thickness increases.

In other words, the point for me is to look at both volume and SIE and wonder for how long extent can reduce at an average of 13% per decade while volume declines at an average of 20% per decade. I am increasingly confident that the break is not happening this year. Using JAXA data, on average 60% of the extent reduction has happened by July 10, and this year is 7% below the 2007-16 average. Combine that with a record or near record low volume and average thickness....? Add that to a winter spring comparable to 2016-2017 and .....

20
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: July 10, 2017, 01:09:55 PM »
Off topic but permissible?
Mission Impossible?

"Please, can we drop the endless repetition of this (unusually high snowfall on the Arctic Ocean) until someone can cite physical basin-wide observational data that supports it and provide monthly maps of snow depth and snow condition that are something beyond an unvalidated algorithm?"

This quote from a very recent thread seems to me to ask for that for now and for an indefinite future is impossible. The resources available for for such a huge project are not there and I doubt will ever be. USAF polar satellite number #20 (cost USD 500 million?) has been sent to the junkyard. NSIDC's data record will stop if / when #18 finally gives up. (Already operating beyond its design life with no replacement in site. The US defence department is looking to
private and foreign government satellites for its future needs.)

ps: A clue regarding Arctic Ocean snowfall last winter to spring is Greenland, which accumulated snowfall about 100 gigatonne more than average and just about the maximum in DMI's 30 year record.

21
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2017 sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 09, 2017, 03:30:31 PM »
JAXA AMSR2 volume below 6,000 km3.
Jaxa sea ice thickness graph shows ice in terrible state except for Atlantic border region.

BUT:-
JAXA sea ice extent losses in July so far well below average. If 2017 follows the last 10 year average (which of course it won't) 58% of the melt has already happened.

The chances of a record minimum have reduced (see table below).


22
I went for 4.25 to 4.75 million km2.

My reasoning(?) was:-

My Jaxa data analysis of SIE daily minimum has been stuck on about 4 million km2 for over a month (and more than half the melt has happened), and the average difference over the last 10 years between that and the NSIDC September average is +0.40 million km2.

But :-
Ocean heat content?,
Low volume ?
Low thickness ?
The weather ?

23
Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: Greenland 2017 melt season
« on: July 09, 2017, 03:03:38 PM »
http://www.dmi.dk/en/groenland/maalinger/greenland-ice-sheet-surface-mass-budget/ is back after  8 days of no updates.

There has actually been a little loss of surface mass. Greenland is a bit warmer than of late. But nothing to write home about.

24
I have gone with 3.75 - 4.25 million km2 because the previous 10 years and the melting season to date bunged into simplistic projections have been stuck in this range for ages.

25
Consequences / Re: Population: Public Enemy No. 1
« on: July 08, 2017, 02:22:04 PM »

Elon Musk likely believes we will be able to produce ten-fold sustainable improvements in farming efficiency (i.e. through in vitro meat and gene editing of plants).

I do, however, highly doubt that a falling population will ever be a problem, because advancements in genetics and biology will likely allow us to grow infants entirely outside the womb in 10-25 years time


With luck I will be dead by the time the world accepts that in vitro meat, gene editing and growing babies outside the womb is normal.

26
Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: Greenland 2017 melt season
« on: July 07, 2017, 02:14:22 PM »
From DMI's Greenland Surface Mass Balance webpage :=
"We are experiencing some temporary operational problems and hope to get the ice sheet surface mass balance back online soon.".

These days always a slight panic - is yet another satellite working beyond its design life with no replacement in sight? One hopes not.

27
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2017 sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 07, 2017, 02:01:58 PM »
The 1 million goal is "impossible" but the 2012 goal not so. 2012 had a freak August extent loss, on ~average volume loss, as posted in one of threads recently. The reason, besides good regional distribution, was the ice was thin coming out of June/July, and a good blow wiped a lot of it. So it could be claimed that the real freak was the early volume loss, and that the later loss was somewhat predictable.
When I'm back at a computer next weekend I will try to dig up some numbers to see if this can be substantiated.
Hullo Oren,
I hope you can do the number business. I guess one day I will have to expand my data collection from just Jaxa Extent to include some volume data, as it is the volume loss to extent loss inconsistency that has to break sometime. Meanwhile some more JAXA numbers before I go to sleep over the weekend.

After the less than average 66,000 drop in extent on July 6, total melt this year of 5.37 million km2 is now 270,000 km2 (4.8%) less than the 2007-16 average. The table below shows that melt has to increase that bit more for even a second lowest minimum. Each day gone is nearly 1.5% of the remaining melt season gone. I have also posted again the chart of daily melt average over the last 10 years, 2012, and 2017 to date, mostly to show the weirdness of 2012.

28
Antarctica / Re: Sea Ice Extent around Antarctica
« on: July 06, 2017, 03:25:17 PM »
Antarctic Sea Ice Extent about to slip from lowest to 2nd lowest behind 1986.
(http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/charctic-interactive-sea-ice-graph/).

Still an impressive reduction over the last 3 years.


29
Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: Greenland 2017 melt season
« on: July 06, 2017, 03:17:43 PM »
http://www.dmi.dk/en/groenland/maalinger/greenland-ice-sheet-surface-mass-budget/ has not been updated since 30th June. Do they have a problem?

http://nsidc.org/greenland-today/ continues to show very low melt.


30
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2017 sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 06, 2017, 02:56:51 PM »
Contrasting Data (JAXA).
Extent is still reducing somewhat below 2007-2016 average. (by about 240,000 km2 to July 5).
Record low looking less likely day by day if previous years are any guide. See Table below.

But Jaxa AMSR2 volume graph shows very impressive volume reduction since mid-June.

31
Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: July 05, 2017, 04:01:59 PM »
There are days when I am encouraged by news on renewable energy. There are days when I am not. Links is :-

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/05/g20-public-finance-for-fossil-fuels-is-four-times-more-than-renewables

32
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: July 05, 2017, 03:17:47 PM »
Did I read on this thread some time ago about the absence of the Polar Jet Stream this summer?
Anyway, I've been looking on cci-reanalyzer and it is there - admittedly more like a piper comanche than a concorde, and sort of around 50 degrees latitude. Although weak, is it sufficient to reduce the flow of warm air into the high Arctic in stark contrast to last winter ? (In the UK there has been a significant temperature variation between south and north of about 51-52 degrees N).
 

33
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: July 05, 2017, 03:06:35 PM »
The vast majority of ASIF members know that volume going down at 20% per decade but extent only at 13% is not sustainable. Sooner rather than later extent has to collapse.
To play Devil's Advocate for a moment ... why does that "have to" happen? 

Yes, they both ought to reach zero at the same time. But that could happen two ways:

* The rate of loss in extent could speed up to match volume
* The rate of loss in volume could slow down to match extent

I think there are lines of reasoning to support both of those. For now I am agnostic.
Good point !! But both your possibilities demonstrate that the relationship is not sustainable.

AGW will continue for a good many years yet and therefore so will the Arctic continue to warm. With volume loss at about 75% and extent loss at around 50%, volume reduction would have to just about stop to equalize the two measures. (I feel a spreadsheet coming on and could not resist). So I put your second option firmly in the improbable (but not impossible) bracket.

An example of how to equalize volume and extent.
Reduce volume loss per annum by 75% to 0.5%, double extent loss rate to 2.5% per annum . Feasible ? - I don't think so. But here it is anyway.

34
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: July 05, 2017, 02:32:03 PM »
There seems to be a substantial number of people on here that, almost pathologically, ignore the difference in the condition of the ice, as well as the volume.  Yeah I know this thread is about extent.  But that doesn't mean you can just pretend all the rest doesn't exist.

Projections based on what happened in the past, focusing on extent exclusively, is beyond unrealistic.
Why do you assume that those who post on this thread "almost pathologically, ignore the difference in the condition of the ice, as well as the volume", and "pretend all the rest doesn't exist". The vast majority of ASIF members know that volume going down at 20% per decade but extent only at 13% is not sustainable. Sooner rather than later extent has to collapse. The question is - when?
The extraordinary weather over winter and spring and amazing loss in volume up to May made me think that perhaps this year is it. But climatic conditions in May and up to now plus the diminishing reduction in volume have made me think twice. I am convinced by Jim Pettit's postings in the PIOMAS thread that a new minimum volume is probable. I am unable to convince myself the same applies to extent. To achieve a record low, let alone the 1 million km2 minimum, requires melting conditions to be unique in the satellite record.

ps "Projections based on what happened in the past, focusing on extent exclusively, is beyond unrealistic." Once again, I wish to say that projections I have posted are not intended as forecasts in any sense of the word. They are tests of what has to happen for certain outcomes, e.g. a record low, compared with past melting seasons. That's all.


35
Antarctica / Re: What's new in Antarctica ?
« on: July 05, 2017, 01:51:56 PM »
One thing Antarctica gives up is stunning images. Herewith cci-reanalyzer's image of the jet  stream.


36
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: July 05, 2017, 01:40:54 PM »

Want to bet on that?  ;)

In order to catch up with 2016, approximately 470,000 km2 of SIE must be lost by 9th July, which translates into roughly 95,000 km2 per day.

So, bet is on. That is all we can do now. ;D
In order to confuse the issue, below is a little table showing the 2007-16 average daily melt 4th to 9th July. Damn close.

Below that is a graph I bashed up to try and get more of a grip on melting season progress. I am still thinking about what it shows. Definitely for 2012 the effect of the GAC in August, and perhaps to show that while the long-term average is smooth, an individual year is all over the place.

37
I am a pedestrian (in England). I have many incidents where motorists assume they have the right of way. They do not. Muddy water ? Only because the urban roads in the USA are crap.

38
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: July 04, 2017, 07:26:37 PM »
Yes you can!

:D

You just don't want to. But on some level, you (and we all) really should ignore previous years. The state of the ice this season is really very different from anything ever happened before. I think i have just one word which describes this melt season best:

The "soup" season.

+1 short and spot on (kurz und knackig) LOL
Want? Don't want? On a hot day a child may want an ice cream. But what the child needs is a glass of water. I am not convinced because as yet the data on previous years and tthe current year to date is insufficiently convincing. But "Thunderbirds are go! Anything can happen in the next half hour !".  (Google for attribution).

39
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: July 04, 2017, 05:06:02 PM »
So the sea ice is melting. Well, it is summer at the height of the melting season. Yes, average thickness of the ice is lower, but not by as much as it was last month. A record low volume is certainly on the cards. I am not convinced about extent, momentum or no momentum.  I cannot ignore what has happened in previous years. I hope the graph below is self-explanatory.


40
The rest / Re: The Trump Presidency (was "Presidential Poll")
« on: July 04, 2017, 03:29:36 PM »
ASLR
I don't think anyone who posts here needs convincing that Trump is a terrible president. Some of us do however believe that impeachment, particularly an impeachment charge based on a Russian conspiracy is the wrong direction to go. Having Pence as our next fearless leader isn't something that I look forward to.
If Trump is charged and wins we'll have 4 more years of Trump, if he loses we get 8 years of Pence, where is the upside?
Terry

Cynical old me has always believed that at best the Law is but an imperfect substitute for justice, and at worst legalised wrong-doing purchased by the highest bidder. So the only action I might take re Trump is to have my "Go Home" banner ready if he pitches up in England.

It sounds to me that you are promoting rule by man over rule by law.  There is an on going investigation by a Special Counsel, which you seem to want to either shutdown or ignore.  It seems to me that your time would be better spent defending democracy from Trump's numerous assaults, rather than trying to put your thumb on the scales of justice.

ASLR

41
Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: Greenland 2017 melt season
« on: July 04, 2017, 03:13:20 PM »
Greenland melt continues to be "The Dog That Did Not Bark". Greenland's cold spell set to continue for several days yet. As previous posts have pointed out that the majority of net mass loss of Greenland's ice sheet is from melt as opposed to calving does this mean the chances are for a net mass gain this year after the amazing snowfall over winter /spring?Any signs of calving being somewhat slow so far this year?

DMI's analysis not updated since June 30 so NSIDC image as at July 2 shown.



42
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2017 sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 04, 2017, 02:14:14 PM »
Once again, I throw in some numbers. Jaxa data as at July 3.

The first little table is a projection of what has to happen for various results. Despite the increase in daily melt recently, nothing really changes. A second lowest minimum looks eminently possible, a record low increasingly unlikely.
The magic 1 million km2 would require remaining melt to be 66% greater than the 2007-16 average remaining melt, over 3 times the variation from the average in the Great Leap Forward of 2012 (19%).

The second table just looks at melt to date and remaining melt over the years. On average, 53% of melting happened by July 3. 2012 looks like an outlier for the melt achieved in the remainder of the season.

Unless the condition of the ice this year is fundamentally, dramatically, different then it still looks like a case of the slow-motion train wreck continuing.

43
The rest / Re: Jason Group - Earth Turning to Mars?
« on: July 03, 2017, 05:47:29 PM »
mars lost its atmosphere because it cooled, lost its molten center and magnetic field and after hundreds of millions of years, the solar wind stripped it of its magnetic field. 

This 'theory' is not based in reality I would be surprised that Guy Mcphereson supports it, though I give him little credibility, I am sure that he has a stronger scientific background that that!

But in the article guy States that the source is from the pentagon Jason group so that should make it more credible
Theta, I recommend more skepticism towards "hype" sources
Read "On The Beach" "from the 1950s. A much more credible novel about the aftermath of all-out nuclear war.

44
Arctic sea ice / Re: Stupid Questions :o
« on: July 03, 2017, 05:24:31 PM »
Is there an easy way to move a posting from the the thread on which it does not belong to the thread to which it does belong ?

45
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: July 03, 2017, 05:09:36 PM »
The Russian Federation has an over-riding military, industrial and economic imperative -to make as much of the Arctic Ocean and its resources its own as possible. So they have their own rules as to when the NSR is open. If a few ships get a few dents and scratches on the way - so what. Russians go in where angels fear to tread. Can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs, ships, people.
Sorry, Neven - couldn't resist.

46
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: July 02, 2017, 07:25:23 PM »
I agree - data must be tested. "Question all assumptions " is always a good motto. However, the response was to a post that suggested that the data was bent through malicious intent. I felt that would not do.

Yep. I'm going to do a further response to what you and Shared Humanity were saying.

However, as I'm being dragged out for some beer to (belatedly) celebrate having dodged the coffin for yet another orbit of Sol, that must, perforce, wait until tomorrow.
The advantage of age is to say "you can wait until tomorrow". I am off to a quiz with some other ancients. The objective is beer and sarcasm to the young.
Happy Birthday.

47
Policy and solutions / Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« on: July 02, 2017, 05:18:05 PM »
Off-topic comment. Wear and tear of the road surface is proportional to the cube of the axle load.
An island in the pacific banned all trucks with gross laden weight greater than 3.5 tonnes.

48

49 so far / 51 to come is the average of the last 10 years (2007-2016). If it does not add up my spreadsheet is stuffed. Just checked - my table starts with rows for each year as follows
 Max
 Min
June 30 melt
 Remaining melt
 Total melt
 Control - all nicely zero.

And no data I have says that a new record minimum is likely.
Thanks for the clarification.
Still, if the 2017 maximum was around 13.8 - 13.9 million km2 (not sure of the exact number) with slightly above 10 million km2 of total melt you should get something around 3.8 - 3.9 million km2.
Coincidentally it is within the range I have just selected
My spreadsheet has refused to budge from that range for weeks. My guess is that it is when average thickness in the arctic basin gets below a critical point is when all bets are off. As the kids in the car say "are we nearly there yet?" and Daddy has to either lie or say  "not yet, darlings".

49
Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: July 02, 2017, 04:38:02 PM »
I agree - data must be tested. "Question all assumptions " is always a good motto. However, the response was to a post that suggested that the data was bent through malicious intent. I felt that would not do.

50
Not sure why you picked 49%, numbers seem to vary a lot, meaning a 52/48 proportion leads to a substantially different result to a 49/51.
But in any case, shouldnt the final result be like one million lower? I think it doesn't add up

49 so far / 51 to come is the average of the last 10 years (2007-2016). If it does not add up my spreadsheet is stuffed. Just checked - my table starts with rows for each year as follows
 Max
 Min
June 30 melt
 Remaining melt
 Total melt
 Control - all nicely zero.

And no data I have says that a new record minimum is likely.



Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9