Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask  (Read 1031430 times)

Darvince

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 318
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 31
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #500 on: September 07, 2016, 06:43:42 AM »
Yes. Click "earth" in bottom left corner, then on the Control row, press «

slow wing

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 823
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 155
  • Likes Given: 546
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #501 on: September 07, 2016, 08:15:31 AM »
It is possible in nullschool to check how the wind was 24 hours or 48 hours ago? How can I do it?
Yes.
1) Click on "earth"
2) at the "Control" line, click on "<<": once for 24h, twice for 48h.

slow wing

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 823
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 155
  • Likes Given: 546
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #502 on: September 07, 2016, 08:25:41 AM »
My stupid question, for the meteorologists:
At this time of year - i.e. near the end of the melt season - is a high pressure system in the Arctic basin helpful or hurtful for the area beneath it to freeze over?

On the one hand, the air near ground level might be a little warmer, as high pressure warms the air due to adiabatic compression.

On the other hand, the skies are more likely to be cloudless. At this time of year I might expect the sky to appear cold and a sink for thermal radiation.

So what is the actual situation?  ???

Juan C. García

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3359
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1279
  • Likes Given: 1127
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #503 on: September 08, 2016, 06:50:33 PM »
It is possible in nullschool to check how the wind was 24 hours or 48 hours ago? How can I do it?
Yes.
1) Click on "earth"
2) at the "Control" line, click on "<<": once for 24h, twice for 48h.

Thanks slow wing!  :)
Which is the best answer to Sep-2012 ASI lost (compared to 1979-2000)?
50% [NSIDC Extent] or
73% [PIOMAS Volume]

Volume is harder to measure than extent, but 3-dimensional space is real, 2D's hide ~50% thickness gone.
-> IPCC/NSIDC trends [based on extent] underestimate the real speed of ASI lost.

Adam Ash

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 311
    • View Profile
    • The 100 metre line
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #504 on: September 09, 2016, 08:01:14 AM »
Am I correct in detecting that when cyclonic dipoles form in the Arctic basin they frequently tend to have one end over high concentration ice pack (low pressure, I think) and the other end (usually high pressure) over clear(er) water?

It would seem reasonable to imagine that the dipole is acting as an energy pump hot to cold. 

Is it merely coincidence that the dipoles end up configured thus, or is the presence of warmer water at one end of the dipole and colder pack ice at the other actually a cause of the dipole formation and of its persistence, rather than an effect?

seaicesailor

  • Guest
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #505 on: September 09, 2016, 12:52:14 PM »
Am I correct in detecting that when cyclonic dipoles form in the Arctic basin they frequently tend to have one end over high concentration ice pack (low pressure, I think) and the other end (usually high pressure) over clear(er) water?

It would seem reasonable to imagine that the dipole is acting as an energy pump hot to cold. 

Is it merely coincidence that the dipoles end up configured thus, or is the presence of warmer water at one end of the dipole and colder pack ice at the other actually a cause of the dipole formation and of its persistence, rather than an effect?
A very loose definition of dipole as a weather pattern should be a cyclone (a low) and an anticyclone (a high), side by side.
So maybe you want to clarify what you mean by "cyclonic dipole"
The high can be over ice pack or open water, the low too. So there are 4 different combinations.
For a more restrictive understanding of what Arctic dipole is, or what is understood in the forum at least (that evil dipole for the ice) is high somewhere in American side of Arctic and low somewhere in the Eurasian side of the Arctic, with large difference of pressure, preferably the high over Beaufort and the low over Laptev for evil minds, sustained for some days, because it pulls Pacific warm air into the Arctic (and possibly water thru Bering dragged by this air flow), it favors Beaufort clockwise surface drift, transpolar drift, and transport of ice toward Fram and the Atlantic.

About the relationship climate change - evil dipole: I heard of scientific studies that find a relationship of global warming/less Arctic sea ice with more frequent formation of this evil dipole. But I heard of others that find a relationship of global warming/less Arctic sea ice with stormier summers. Is drinking wine in moderate quantities good for health? Go figure.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2016, 01:28:16 PM by seaicesailor »

CognitiveBias

  • New ice
  • Posts: 90
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #506 on: September 09, 2016, 03:58:08 PM »
Are there any forums dedicated to debunking the pseudo-scientific denier claims.  I'm specifically interested in the "Feet of Clay' series.

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #507 on: September 09, 2016, 07:38:05 PM »
I've never heard of the Feet of Clay series, but Google "Skeptical Science".
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

Cate

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 199
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #508 on: September 09, 2016, 09:17:14 PM »
I googled "Feet of Clay climate". WUWT shows up. Nuff said.

crandles

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3379
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 81
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #509 on: September 09, 2016, 09:34:41 PM »
I googled "Feet of Clay climate". WUWT shows up. Nuff said.

or
Quote
Feet of clay: The official errors that exaggerated global warming – part 3
Guest Blogger / 3 days ago September 6, 2016
Part III: How the feedback factor f was exaggerated

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

Christopher Monckton. Nuff said.


But perhaps some people do want more. Not sure if this is the same stuff:

Quote
Summary of Part 1:  In his latest book, The Great Global Warming Blunder, Roy Spencer lashes out at the rest of the climate science community for either ignoring or suppressing publication of his research.  This research, he claims, virtually proves that the climate models used by the IPCC respond much too sensitively to external “forcing” due to changes in greenhouse gas concentrations, variations in solar radiation, and so on.  Instead, Spencer believes most climate change is caused by chaotic, natural variations in cloud cover.  He and a colleague published a peer-reviewed paper in which they used a simple climate model to show that these chaotic variations could cause patterns in satellite data that would lead climatologists to believe the climate is significantly more sensitive to external forcing than it really is.  Spencer admits, however, that his results may only apply to very short timescales.  Since the publication of his book, furthermore, other scientists (including one that initially gave Spencer’s paper a favorable review) have shown that Spencer was only able to obtain this result by assuming unrealistic values for various model parameters.
from
https://bbickmore.wordpress.com/2011/02/25/roy-spencers-great-blunder-part-1/


CognitiveBias

  • New ice
  • Posts: 90
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #510 on: September 09, 2016, 10:29:16 PM »

Neven, I will definitely add Skeptical Science to my reading list.  BTW, your typepad site was my first intro to the Arctic Ice/climate topic that I now find so fascinating.  Thank you!

Cate and crandals,  thanks for the responses as well.  'Nuff said' is all it takes for those that hold Watts and his type in contempt.  Here in ultra-conservative suburbs of Dallas TX, I am often in the minority defending against his type of pseudo-scientific efforts and other types of magical and conspiratorial thinking.  I was just looking for resources that might help.

 Thanks again!

Cate

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 199
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #511 on: September 10, 2016, 12:32:21 AM »
CognitiveBias, my apologies if my post came off as brusque, as that was not my intention!

If you are looking for info to refute deniers,  may I recommend Robertscribbler's blog as an excellent starting point for the general reader. The discussion is civil, informed, and focused, with no denial and no doom-saying allowed, and the links---both the blogger's as well as those posted by readers---are solid.

robertscribbler.com

CalamityCountdown

  • New ice
  • Posts: 61
    • View Profile
    • Calamity Countdown
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 45
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #512 on: September 10, 2016, 04:56:36 PM »
Can the impact of an El Nino on Arctic Sea Ice melt be calculated with a reasonable degree of confidence? And is the end of the “Godzilla” El Niño a significant factor in predicting the likelihood of a lower minimum for extent/area during the 2017 melting season than the minimum we are on the verge of seeing for 2016?   

Adam Ash

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 311
    • View Profile
    • The 100 metre line
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #513 on: September 11, 2016, 10:18:56 AM »
A very loose definition of dipole as a weather pattern should be a cyclone (a low) and an anticyclone (a high), side by side....

Thanks SeaIceS.  Yes the dipole I was thinking about was a cyclone+anti-cyclone pair, as they seem to be capable of creating more havoc. 

I guess what I was wondering was to what extent the presence of these structures is a Cause and what is an Effect of the prevailing ice conditions?  With the increasing open sea water surface one could imagine more and/or stronger energy-moving structures occurring over the polar region.

seaicesailor

  • Guest
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #514 on: September 11, 2016, 11:56:18 AM »
A very loose definition of dipole as a weather pattern should be a cyclone (a low) and an anticyclone (a high), side by side....

Thanks SeaIceS.  Yes the dipole I was thinking about was a cyclone+anti-cyclone pair, as they seem to be capable of creating more havoc. 

I guess what I was wondering was to what extent the presence of these structures is a Cause and what is an Effect of the prevailing ice conditions?  With the increasing open sea water surface one could imagine more and/or stronger energy-moving structures occurring over the polar region.
Yes there are scientific studies about the same, not that I understand them though.
I wouldnt be surprised that this pattern has been happening for ages only that now it blows warmer air over thinner air. But this is stuff for scientists to unravel I guess
http://scholar.google.es/scholar_url?url=https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/94959/grl25555.pdf%3Fsequence%3D1%26isAllowed%3Dy&hl=en&sa=X&scisig=AAGBfm1e6_zLk0rvGnJkED9a6t0QGS4kHw&nossl=1&oi=scholarr&ved=0ahUKEwi47Z6thofPAhWJthoKHaHGAuoQgAMIGigAMAA

binntho

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2193
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 878
  • Likes Given: 235
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #515 on: September 12, 2016, 08:35:39 AM »
A stupid question, perhaps, and definitely off topic but I'm hoping some of the very clever people on this forum can help me. For some years now I've been wanting to find something that shows monthly and annual precipitation anomalies, particularly for the Mediterranean where I live, but also for the whole world. Something similar to the monthly temperature anomalies from NASA and others is what I had in mind. Has anybody ever come across something like that?
because a thing is eloquently expressed it should not be taken to be as necessarily true
St. Augustine, Confessions V, 6

ruffed

  • New ice
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 43

charles_oil

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 337
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 38
  • Likes Given: 74
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #517 on: September 12, 2016, 09:52:11 AM »
Bin - try your national meteo office / bureau for archives.  Here in France you can find online historical data for your own location & should be able to check between two world cities as well.
http://www.meteofrance.com/climat/meteo-date-passee?lieuId=060880&lieuType=VILLE_FRANCE&date=01-09-2016
I am sure they hold graphical / tabular historical data too.

Tor Bejnar

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4606
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 879
  • Likes Given: 826
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #518 on: September 12, 2016, 03:17:17 PM »
Binntho:
Try looking around the NOAA Global Precipitation Climatology Centre site.  For example, the left menu has a 'plotting' option.  I found a combination of data set and variables options to give a plot of precipitation anomalies of the Mediterranean area:

This doesn't mean I know what the plot means!
« Last Edit: September 12, 2016, 05:18:15 PM by Tor Bejnar »
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things because "we cannot negotiate with the melting point of ice"

binntho

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2193
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 878
  • Likes Given: 235
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #519 on: September 12, 2016, 04:04:50 PM »
Thanks all for the replies! I've had a look at the different sites, and I think the one Tor pointed me to is exactly what I've been looking for!
because a thing is eloquently expressed it should not be taken to be as necessarily true
St. Augustine, Confessions V, 6

CalamityCountdown

  • New ice
  • Posts: 61
    • View Profile
    • Calamity Countdown
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 45
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #520 on: September 12, 2016, 05:36:20 PM »
Based on the information showing on the NSIDC site http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/charctic-interactive-sea-ice-graph/, it appears that the minimum extent for the ASI 2016 melting season occurred about 4 days earlier than average, based on the 5 day average extent versus 1981 - 2010.  (assuming 9/10 holds as the minimum). Given all the open water, is that fact that minimum extent occurred a few days earlier than average a meaningful event (based on NSIDC and assuming I'm reading the data correctly)

Adam Ash

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 311
    • View Profile
    • The 100 metre line
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #521 on: September 15, 2016, 11:55:27 AM »
Over in the Polls Pmt111500 mentioned among preferred options for the post-1M sqkm ice era that by then there would not be a  '...marine Arctic biotope anymore'.

A lot of Arctic marine life would be impacted by even the recent reductions in surface ice area, but are there any estimates of mortality among polar bears when an area like the Wrangle Arm is separated from the main pack, and then goes poof?

I know PBs can swim vast distances, but I doubt they could have made it from the Wrangle Arm to anywhere above water before they ran out of energy supplies and perished from starvation mid stroke.

Gray-Wolf

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 948
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 131
  • Likes Given: 458
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #522 on: October 11, 2016, 09:34:02 AM »
Hi Guys!

How did Barrentz move from ice covered to ice part ice free over winter during the noughties?

I'm only wondering this since the 'October slowdown' in ice re-growth, could it be signalling a move to part covered over in Beaufort?

Has Barrentz ,via open water processes, now become even more unlikely to see ice now over winter and if the answer is 'yes' then will the extension of the open water ( spring and autumn) across Beaufort make it less likely to see ice forming there?

Ta in advance!
KOYAANISQATSI

ko.yaa.nis.katsi (from the Hopi language), n. 1. crazy life. 2. life in turmoil. 3. life disintegrating. 4. life out of balance. 5. a state of life that calls for another way of living.
 
VIRESCIT VULNERE VIRTUS

oren

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9805
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3584
  • Likes Given: 3922
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #523 on: October 11, 2016, 09:57:33 AM »
I doubt it, the Beaufort is too cold and isolated during winter for ice not to form. The Barents gets warm water from the Atlantic, I believe this causes a fundamental difference.
I tried looking for a chart of winter max and summer min for the Beaufort, this could show the answer statistically. My gut feeling is that the Beaufort has transitioned to an ice-free state during summer, but that winters have almost full ice-cover except where polynyas form due to ice movement.

Edit: found it through Neven's blog, I knew it was there somewhere. This is area, not extent.

As you can see, the Beaufort is maxed out at winter but has been reaching zero and near zero more and more in the summer, by now it's quite consistent. I believe the ice-free season may be lengthening, but in deep winter it will still be ice-covered.
The Barents has always had a seasonal ice cover, but in the last decade winter cover is disappearing, now it's less than half what it used to be.

« Last Edit: October 11, 2016, 12:14:58 PM by oren »

Forest Dweller

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 138
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #524 on: November 04, 2016, 03:43:58 PM »
Hello all from a new member, thought i'd start here :)

I have a question concerning Blue Ocean Event.
Not the effects on the global weather etc, but a 2-prong question concerning before and after sea ice behaviour;

Before:
I gather melting of the sea ice will happen at accelerated pace.
Supposedly the last sea ice will disappear very fast, poof it's gone.
Any more specific models or study on this?
At what point of total sea ice volume left perhaps, do we really expect things to unravel
exponentially?

After:
I hear people say how after the first blue ocean in the Arctic, it will take 10 years of
refreezing less and less before finally in winter even nothing will remain.
Really???
Watching the current 2016-2017 refreeze so out of whack this seems hardly believable.
Add in some feedback loops...to a layperson i cant imagine 10 years of refreeze happening.
Feels more like we'd be lucky to have 1 winter with ice after that or 2 perhaps...

Any thoughts welcome.

P-maker

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 389
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 72
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #525 on: November 04, 2016, 06:25:22 PM »
Hello Forest Dweller

Welcome to the Forum. You’ve certainly got some nerve to walk in here and pose questions like that:

1)   You are not a member, you are primarily a contributor here
2)   If you wish to read about Blue Ocean Events in the Arctic, please start here: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Koji_Yamazaki2/publication/308009569_On_the_atmospheric_response_experiment_to_a_Blue_Arctic_Ocean_Climate_Response_to_Blue_Arctic_Ocean/links/57d8a0aa08ae5f03b498608f.pdf?origin=publication_list
3)   Concerning your ”Before” questions, this has been a long-standing debate both at the Blog and at the Forum. Too difficult to summarize in a few sentences.
4)   Concerning your “After” questions, I’ll have a go at it below.

I don’t like the concept of “Blue Ocean Event” because it will not be anything like an event, which A) may  suddenly occur one day, B) be described in the media amongst the ordinary news feed, and then C) pop up again later one day.

The colour “Blue” may not be an appropriate description, since open water in the Arctic may take all kinds of colours to the naked eye. In addition, all kinds of satellites may depict the whole electro-magnetic spectrum in all kinds of odd colours afterwards. Maybe it would be more appropriate to talk about an “Open Ocean Signal”. I foresee all kinds of blue-green algae adding to the complexity of the palette as we go along.

Concerning the “Ocean” part, I – and others for that matter – have foreseen that the central Arctic basin may be ice-free sooner than most people here expect. On the contrary, we are still uncertain as to the amount/volume/level of ice production in the marginal seas during winters in the future, and hence the advection of these ice volumes into the Arctic Ocean afterwards. 10 years of marginal seas refreezing may not be totally out of the question. At least 10 years of catastrophic devastation of the Greenlandic tidewater glaciers is highly likely after the date. This exodus of brash ice – this armada of icebergs – will in itself help to keep up both extent and area in the seas adjoining the ice sheet.

It is not going to be an “Event” of a kind you may be used to. I’ll spare you the details of the consequences at this time, but I hope you will find the time to look through some of the threads in the “Consequences” part of the Forum over the weekend and then come back, when you have made up your mind.


Forest Dweller

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 138
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #526 on: November 05, 2016, 05:33:43 PM »
Hi P-Maker,

I meant no offence and did try to read relevant topics, there is a lot out there.
I would agree already the "event"is not a correct description at all.
Thank you for your perspective on the "after" and also the "blue".
This would make a lot of sense indeed.

Thanks for the link which i will certainly check out.
As the other points you mentioned, and perhaps get back later as you suggest.


oren

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9805
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3584
  • Likes Given: 3922
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #527 on: November 05, 2016, 08:30:46 PM »
Welcome Forest Dwelller! The first post is really the hardest. It's a great forum, you'll learn a lot and I'm sure will contribute as well over time.
Regarding your question, it is definitely not stupid but is too large and unknown, there is no easy answer but here's a summary of my own thinking:
Leading up to a "relatively ice-free Arctic in late summer" will probably be a season of weak ice to start with, increased melt due to weather and incoming heat from the periphery, and finally the defined mark of "less than 1 million square kilometers of sea ice extent" considered "ice-free Arctic". Probably some ice will be left somewhere next to Ellesmere Island, the CAA or Greenland, and here and there. An acceleration towards the "end"  is possible because of thinner ice going poof, but on the other hand this will happen towards the end of the melting season, when melt rates are much lower.
As to after the "event", you should not be surprised to see the Arctic Ocean wholly or partially refreezing during winter for quite a long time to come. It generally takes -10oC to effectively freeze sea water. The central Arctic at midwinter goes to -35oC. Even with all kinds of warming and feedbacks, water vapor, waves and storms, CO2 etc., some part of the Arctic during some part of the winter will reach the required temps and refreeze. Bear in mind the central Arctic is currently "ice-full" during 8 months of the year, while many peripheral seas are ice-full for 5 months. Even with a longer ice-free period, you might still get to full extent, just for a shorter time. I expect the same to happen this year as well. There is a good probability though that after the winter refreeze following the "ice free" end of season, the next summer will find it easy to reach the same ice-free state again, although there have been strong arguments as to why even that is not expected (the "Slow Transition" theory).

Gray-Wolf

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 948
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 131
  • Likes Given: 458
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #528 on: November 07, 2016, 12:36:39 PM »
Hi Forest Dweller!

This past year has altered my views on the B.O.E.
In the past I thought it would take another 'perfect melt storm synoptic' year over a pack like we went into this summer with to have a chance of such a thing occurring but not now! After seeing the repeated fragmentation events over winter and then the early start to melt season I began to think that pre conditioning the pack was just as important as the weather was?
I now think of 'cold transition' and 'warm transition'. This year showed us what a cold transition would be like with a very fragile pack just not having it in it to survive an 'average' melt season. the 'warm transition' would be the return of the perfect melt storm synoptic and so could lead to either an Aug melt out for a weak pack or an early Sept melt out for a more substantial pack?
This year we are seeing our last, best ice, sat over Fram/Barentsz and so likely to be lost over the coming winter ( being replaced inside the pack with late formed first Year ice?) so we may end up with a pack similar to the one we will have after the first B.O.E. If this happens then a cold transition is possible next year (if we see another warm and disruptive refreeze season) and a very early B.O.E. if we see a return of the Perfect melt storm synoptics over the duration of melt sweason!
KOYAANISQATSI

ko.yaa.nis.katsi (from the Hopi language), n. 1. crazy life. 2. life in turmoil. 3. life disintegrating. 4. life out of balance. 5. a state of life that calls for another way of living.
 
VIRESCIT VULNERE VIRTUS

CalamityCountdown

  • New ice
  • Posts: 61
    • View Profile
    • Calamity Countdown
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 45
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #529 on: November 11, 2016, 12:15:45 PM »
According to nsidc.org "Ice extent is particularly low on both sides of the Antarctic Peninsula. The rapid early reduction in sea ice cover in this region may create favorable conditions for the break up of the eastern Peninsula ice shelves at the end of austral summer. Similar sea ice trends and weather conditions were present during the spring seasons preceding past ice shelf retreats (e.g., 2001 to 2002)".  Raises the question of what is the worst case scenario for this year's Antarctic melt season? And how can I give this question an arctic sea ice slant so that it is at least marginally on topic?

crandles

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3379
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 81
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #530 on: November 11, 2016, 01:12:29 PM »
Hi and welcome to the forum.


Before:
I gather melting of the sea ice will happen at accelerated pace.
Supposedly the last sea ice will disappear very fast, poof it's gone.
Any more specific models or study on this?
At what point of total sea ice volume left perhaps, do we really expect things to unravel
exponentially?


While some people seem to think this, I think it is a small minority of experts in the relevant field perhaps just Wadhams who is easy to dismiss as 'gone emeritus'. Reading this forum gives the impression it is much more mainstream.

If you look at plots of lots of models you should see that pretty much all models show a slowing of the rate of decline as zero ice in September is approached:



So I would say all the models and studies deny it.

I think maybe in the region of 100 years would be a more mainstream view of how long between ice free September and ice free year round. With no sunshine and no ice as insulation, the ocean can lose enormous quantities of heat. There would have to be very thick clouds to reduce the rate of heat loss. Equable climates happened somehow and we are not sure how let alone know enough about the transition process. I would guess the transition time would be long with the ocean slowly gaining heat but that is only a guess and I cannot rule out a much shorter transition time.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2016, 01:22:06 PM by crandles »

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3511
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 899
  • Likes Given: 206
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #531 on: November 11, 2016, 02:14:30 PM »
Thanks for that graph. When I look at that graph I don't see the models being right. What I see is observations well below the mean and median of the models, indicating an acceleration in extent reduction not observed in the models. I also see several models that project ice free within 10 years.

Another thing that comes to mind is that these are sea ice extent models. Extent hides so many nuances that I don't think it is a good measure of the state of the ice. Are there any models of Arctic sea ice volume? How are those stacking up with reality? How about ice age. Are there any models for ice age? If so, how do they stack up to reality?

I also fear that many of these models assume that the year after an ice free arctic the temperature of the atmosphere above the arctic will be -40C. This freezing season clearly show that the arctic temperatures can be much higher than they have ever been before. How does this fact affect the models? My bet is that the bounds are significantly altered.




I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

johnm33

  • Guest
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #532 on: November 11, 2016, 02:21:24 PM »
Forest Dweller Welcome,"At what point of total sea ice volume left perhaps, do we really expect things to unravel exponentially?" good question, made me think anyway. I think this graph from Jim Pettit answers it. Looking at the approaching equality of max possible melt, and seasonal max, soon.

  Much depends on where the thick ice is,in any year, it inhibits the loss of meltwater and the fresh water input from Siberian rivers, and resists the inflow of Atlantic waters, but only when it's on the coast of the CAA. Once free of that coast it's movement probably adds to the stirring of warm deeper layers. This year the thicker/older ice is spread out but it seems there's enough on the coast, for now. http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/4510

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3511
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 899
  • Likes Given: 206
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #533 on: November 11, 2016, 02:45:17 PM »
https://www.arcus.org/sipn/sea-ice-outlook/2016/august

It contains an analysis of models vs observed results of arctic sea ice.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

oren

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9805
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3584
  • Likes Given: 3922
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #534 on: November 11, 2016, 02:56:45 PM »
According to nsidc.org "Ice extent is particularly low on both sides of the Antarctic Peninsula. The rapid early reduction in sea ice cover in this region may create favorable conditions for the break up of the eastern Peninsula ice shelves at the end of austral summer. Similar sea ice trends and weather conditions were present during the spring seasons preceding past ice shelf retreats (e.g., 2001 to 2002)".  Raises the question of what is the worst case scenario for this year's Antarctic melt season? And how can I give this question an arctic sea ice slant so that it is at least marginally on topic?

A very good question. I suggest you post this in the appropriate thread, Sea Ice Extent around Antarctica. Best if you include the link for the nsidc article you are referring to.
http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1759.0.html

As this forum deals with Antarctica as well as arctic sea ice, your question is definitely on topic.

Shared Humanity

  • Guest
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #535 on: November 11, 2016, 03:24:54 PM »
I love both of these graphs and it is clear there is an accelerating trend visible that the models are not capturing. However these graphs track how rapidly we are heading to a seasonally ice free Arctic. I would not be surprised if this were to happen quite soon, perhaps within 10 years. I would also not be surprised if it took much longer.

These graphs do not, however, say anything about a year long ice free Arctic. Years ago I proposed a new measure that might be useful to track. This would be the annual spread between minimum ice extent (perhaps area as well) and maximum ice extent. The minimums are dropping quite rapidly and this drop is accelerating. The maximum extent is not dropping as quickly so that this seasonal spread between minimum and maximum is actually increasing. I suggested that we call this metric the "Bifurcated Intra-annual Chryosphere Oscillation Trend" (BICOT), also known as "Baby Its Cold Out There".  ;)

It is true that winter temperatures over the Arctic are increasing during the winter. The anomalies as I type are spectacular. The actual temperatures are still quite adequate to cause a rapid freeze (less so now but still rapid). For the winter temperatures to finally reach a point where freeze does not occur in the long Arctic night would require, I believe, a phase change in global climate. I am not sure what that mechanism would be but I am very intrigued by the theory of our three atmospheric cells transitioning into a single cell as the cause. Some here have postulated that this transition to one cell would first move to two cells. I don't believe this is the case. I think the transition is an immediate transition from three to one.

Why this quick transition to one cell? If you look at the model below and the behavior of the Hadley, Ferrel and Polar cells, the cell that will disappear is the Ferrel cell. We will then have a single cell with warm air rising at the equator, traveling all of the way to the pole and sinking over the pole. The trade winds are tied directly to the three cells and would be wildly altered. It would seem that they might similarly set up in a manner that would bring very warm, moisture laden, tropical atmosphere all of the way to the Arctic, a very stormy Arctic indeed.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2016, 03:30:08 PM by Shared Humanity »

Shared Humanity

  • Guest
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #536 on: November 11, 2016, 03:40:22 PM »
So, how close are we to this phase change? I have no idea. We know the Hadley cell is expanding and the Polar Vortex is breaking down more frequently, flooding the mid latitudes with cold polar air. Is this evidence of us approaching this transition? When it happens, there is no going back. The impact on northern hemisphere climate will be permanent from our time limited human perspective.

What is really interesting is that the paleo record suggests this transition to an equable climate can occur in the northern hemisphere while the frozen Antarctic ice sheet will maintain a three cell circulation in the southern hemisphere.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2016, 04:01:24 PM by Shared Humanity »

Pmt111500

  • Guest
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #537 on: November 11, 2016, 04:13:21 PM »
The two cells in question would be permanently cloudy arctic with great arctic cyclone type depression moving about, and the hadley cell would expand to cover northern mediterranean, southern US and the whole of India and large parts of southern China, from these the dry air of greatly expanded desert belt would flow northward towards the depression (wacc+hadley expansion). I cannot say what parts of the desert edges would get monsoonal rains generated by trade winds and how much rain would be there (if at all). Nh 1-cell system and Sh 3-cell system would have been in Pliocene, was it? 15 m of sea level rise from total collapse of Greenland ice sheet and partial collapse of WAIS, i think compared to current times. I don't know which is better, I'm fairly certain I'm dead before either gets fully implemented.

oren

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9805
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3584
  • Likes Given: 3922
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #538 on: November 11, 2016, 04:28:08 PM »
As the cells discussion is deepening, it should be better to move it to an existing or a new thread rather than be clogged here in Stupid Questions.

crandles

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3379
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 81
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #539 on: November 11, 2016, 05:54:16 PM »
Thanks for that graph. When I look at that graph I don't see the models being right.

Absolutely, many of them are miles out. So don't trust them on the level of ice.

But what they do show is widespread agreement on the shape - this is an acceleration in the rate of loss of sea ice but then there is deceleration in the rate as zero ice is approached.

I suggest it is sensible to trust the models where there is widespread agreement but don't trust them when there isn't.

The models that show ice free by 2025 have nowhere near enough ice for last two or three decades so should be regarded as not trust worthy.

The whole argument for a rapid disappearance seems to rest on seeing a sudden acceleration in the observed rate of decline and simply assuming that continues. This flies in the face of the models saying that can tend to happen for a while but also tends to reverse to a deceleration in the rate of decline.


Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3511
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 899
  • Likes Given: 206
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #540 on: November 11, 2016, 06:52:29 PM »
I'm hesitant to post again, because this is the stupid question threads. OP's question was not stupid, just hard to answer and controversial. Funny thing is that a question like that would have been dismissed at any serious scientific forum.

Quote
But what they do show is widespread agreement on the shape - this is an acceleration in the rate of loss of sea ice but then there is deceleration in the rate as zero ice is approached.

I agree that most models that can be made out on that graph have an agreement in shape within the models. However the shape they agree on is potentially different from the shape of observations. Recent observations seem to approach the opposite inflection point of models. Models inflect up, observation seem to be inflecting down. I admit more years are needed to even determine an inflection, but in my understanding, the physics are there to make it happen.

Quote
The models that show ice free by 2025 have nowhere near enough ice for last two or three decades so should be regarded as not trust worthy.

Yep, but that does not mean that we should ignore emerging trends. The emerging trend since 2007 is ominous and getting worse as we type.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

plinius

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 403
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #541 on: November 11, 2016, 07:09:10 PM »
Ahem, Shared-Humanity - I am not sure where you get your physics of all atmospheric cells merging, but it is in truth very simple. The size of the Hadley Cell is given by where the subtropical jet gets too fast to remain stable (the air from the ITC going northward achieves a large eastward speed), and there is no way at current earth rotation of stretching that thing even anywhere close to the pole. So, one could debate about disrupting the central polar vortex, but well, in the northern hemisphere it has never been that stable anyway (see also sudden stratospheric warming events). So, quite a useless discussion.

@Archimid: I am not sure about the downward acceleration in observations. Yes, for the past 30 years or so, and fully agreed that the ice models were too tame on that, but exactly now we are entering a new regime, where actually wide open areas of water give some negative feedback on the annual volume budget - they freeze over with ~1.5 m or so of ice in the winter. To me it looks like winter duration is still too long to break this.
So the conditions to ask about are:
- Do we have any space for feedbacks that could reduce the amount of winter freeze to a level where the arctic ocean can accumulate heat in a runaway by early spring openings.
- Are the feedbacks that drive this larger than the current negative feedback on the energy budget by having less insulation from ice on top of the ocean (and if you look up for e.g. Langlaufer's papers, at least to me it looks like on a simplified view, we are still quite a way from that point).
- Is the possible equilibrium of a summer-ice-free arctic ocean possible by drift/currents earlier than reaching this point? (which seems possible to me, especially if there is some more salinity and atmospheric circulation feedback on the European edge).

Ice Shieldz

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 249
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 59
  • Likes Given: 58
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #542 on: November 11, 2016, 11:38:51 PM »
Does anybody know what causes the signal of a band of warmer water to show up around the ice pack in nullshool?

Edit:  Oh it seems those are the currents - although in many instances the heat doesn't line up with where the currents are occurring.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2016, 11:50:39 PM by Ice Shieldz »

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3511
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 899
  • Likes Given: 206
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #543 on: November 11, 2016, 11:50:14 PM »
Ahem, Shared-Humanity ... So, quite a useless discussion.

could you please refrain from such language? I'm trying to stay as civil as possible about a matter I believe to be of life and death for me and everyone else alive.  You keep using words to make this argument seem irrelevant or unimportant.

Quote
@Archimid: I am not sure about the downward acceleration in observations.

Please see the arctic sea ice volume anomaly and trend here :
http://psc.apl.uw.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/schweiger/ice_volume/BPIOMASIceVolumeAnomalyCurrentV2.1.png

That's downward acceleration.

Quote
Yes, for the past 30 years or so, and fully agreed that the ice models were too tame on that,


I would say that after 2007 the long range models have consistently underestimated the melting but ok.

Quote
but exactly now we are entering a new regime, where actually wide open areas of water give some negative feedback on the annual volume budget - they freeze over with ~1.5 m or so of ice in the winter. To me it looks like winter duration is still too long to break this.

My bet is that this high temperatures are only the beginning. winters will keep getting progressively weaker as the ice disappears. Once a tipping point minimum arctic sea ice occurs (it could've happened this year)then the state of the arctic (and the world) changes and the warming winters rapidly accelerate. That's the inflection point.

I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

Pmt111500

  • Guest
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #544 on: November 12, 2016, 04:54:07 AM »
Quote

: plinius  November 11, 2016, 06:09:10 PM
Ahem, Shared-Humanity ... So, quite a useless discussion.


could you please refrain from such language? I'm trying to stay as civil as possible about a matter I believe to be of life and death for me and everyone else alive.  You keep using words to make this argument seem irrelevant or unimportant.


Umm, it so happens QBO just flipped, and that shouldn't have happened either if we're to follow old textbooks. The subtropical jet may well stay where it is in the stratosphere even in equable climate, for all I care.

The movement and expansion of the desert belt in that scenario could possibly generate new areas for monsoonal rains so there's that hope for some of the areas affected.
« Last Edit: November 12, 2016, 05:11:50 AM by Pmt111500 »

Sleepy

  • Guest
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #545 on: November 12, 2016, 08:13:08 AM »
@Archmid; I feel no need to argue with anyone in here but there is a history to this issue on this forum, and what plinius wrote above is correct.
Quote
"The size of the Hadley Cell is given by where the subtropical jet gets too fast to remain stable (the air from the ITC going northward achieves a large eastward speed), and there is no way at current earth rotation of stretching that thing even anywhere close to the pole."
This was up in the freezing seasons thread when someone claimed an observation of the Hadley Cell expansion into the Arctic. In my comment there I gave a link to an older thread:
http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1107.msg43463.html#msg43463
Read the first linked paper there:
http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/gv219/classics.d/persson_on_coriolis05.pdf
It explains the history and also provides an answer to why so many still gets this wrong. I'll just quote the last section.
Quote
Correspondents to the American Journal of Physics have noted that university students
cherish naïve, Aristotelian ideas about how and why things move. For example, many students
believe that forces keep bodies in motion and, conversely, that in the absence of forces bodies are at rest.35 There are no reasons to assume that students in meteorology are immune to this
“Aristotelian physics” as it has been called. The crux of the matter does not lay in the
mathematics but in our common senses which are still Aristotelian.
Finally adding a graph depicting how flawed our common senses can be, can you sense the speed you are travelling at right now?

S.Pansa

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 175
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #546 on: November 12, 2016, 09:47:12 AM »
This site might provide some further useful infos w.r.t. what could have caused the various equable climates during earths history (see the theories section).

One of those theories - from Brian Farrell - is about the Hadley cell and the possible mechanisms, under which it could expand to the poles. Some snippets:

Quote
... Eventually, the zonal velocity is so strong that the particle stops moving poleward and only travels to the east. At this latitude, air sinks, and then to close the loop, it returns to the equator along the surface. Therefore, because of the conservation of angular momentum, Hadley Cells exist only from the equator to the mid-latitudes. ...

This scenario holds as long as the initial assumptions are valid. Brian Farrell, however, argues that the assumptions are not accurate for equable climates and that during equable climates, angular momentum is not conserved in poleward moving particles (1990). ...

Based off of Venus' atmosphere's behavior, Farrell argues that another way to extend the Hadley Cells would be to increase the height of the tropopause. ...

While each of these alterations [stronger angular momentum sinks & increase in the tropopause height] to the atmosphere would extend the Hadley Cells, Farrell found that a combination of the two effects was necessary to make his model's results agree with proxy data from equable climates. ... The results reveal that as tropopause height and friction increase, the EPTD decreases. ... As a result, Farrell's theory seems to be a reasonable explanation for equable climates. ...

The main problem is that Farrell does not provide any explanation for why angular momentum sinks would have become stronger during the Cretaceous and the Eocene. He provides a few examples of potential momentum sinks: "small scale diffusion..., cumulus momentum flux..., gravity wave drag..., and the net westward force arising from potential vorticity mixing by large scale waves" ... This lack of information in the argument makes the theory harder to accept, and until this portion of the argument is explored in greater depth, Farrell's theory cannot be accepted as the correct explanation of equable climates.

For more details see the tab "Hadley Cell".
As the References does not extend beyond 2010, however, I do not know if this theory has still some value.

Sleepy

  • Guest
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #547 on: November 12, 2016, 10:11:49 AM »
Which is exactly the same source and link that spurred to my comment that I linked to above, from January 2015.
Another of the comments I got from Anders Persson back then was (freely translated) this: The tropopause has, unlike what some authorities claim, very little, if anything, to do with this. It doesn't even have a material surface.

S.Pansa

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 175
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #548 on: November 12, 2016, 11:57:35 AM »
So for someone who is way out of his depth here: Is Persson the go-to guy for these matters? And is the controversy about what caused equable climates on earth resolved now?

A quick research did not really give me a satisfying answer.

According to this paper from Lee, 2014, the controversy is still ongoing, at least until recently (p 33, 34).
Quote
... Until  recently,  proposed  mechanisms  on  equable  climates that have considered poleward heat transports include a Hadley cell which occupies the entire hemisphere (Farrell, 1990), an enhanced poleward oceanic heat transport (e.g., Barron  et al ., 1993; Sloan  et al ., 1995), and an intensification of the thermohaline circulation due to driving by tropical cyclones (Sriver and Huber, 2007; Korty  et al ., 2008). There are other proposed mechanisms  that  do  not  involve  poleward  heat  transports.
These  include  a  convection-cloud  radiative  forcing  feedback (Sewall and Sloan, 2004; Abbot and Tziperman, 2008a, b), a vegetation-climate  feedback  (Otto-Bliesner  and  Upchurch,
1997; DeConto  et al ., 2000), and decreased cloud reflectivity due to a reduction in the number of cloud condensation nuclei(Kump and Pollard, 2008). But again, as was discussed above,
an equilibrium climate requires an increased poleward energy flux. Therefore, a mechanism that can account for the increased poleward energy flux is still needed. ...
In fact, the hemisphere-wide  Hadley  cell  (Farrell,  1990),  whose  sinking branch occurs in the Arctic, can warm high-latitude continental interior. However, this theory requires a tropopause height of ~30 km, 2-3 times that of the present-day value.


He proposes another mechanism, calles TEAM. If I got the right (most probably I didn't), this is about an enhanced poleward heat transport via  atmospheric baroclinic eddies (see figure below.

Another interesting paper is Hasegawa 2012 called "Drastic shrinking of the Hadley circulation during the mid-Cretaceous Supergreenhouse".  Which concludes that at a certain CO2-level, the Hadley cell actually shrinks:

Quote
The latitudinal shifts in the subtropical high-pressure belt appear to be related to changes in the width of the Hadley circulation, which could be linked to the changes in global temperatures and/or atmospheric CO2 levels during the Cretaceous. These results, in conjunction with observations of modern climate, suggest that (1) the Hadley circulation gradually expands poleward in response to increasing global temperatures and/or atmospheric CO2 levels, and (2) when global temperatures and/or atmospheric CO2 levels exceed a certain threshold, the Hadley circulation drastically shrinks equatorwards.
(p 1333). See also figure below

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3511
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 899
  • Likes Given: 206
Re: "Smart" and "Stupid" Questions - Feel Free To Ask
« Reply #549 on: November 12, 2016, 12:50:38 PM »
Quote
@Archmid; I feel no need to argue with anyone in here but there is a history to this issue on this forum, and what plinius wrote above is correct.

 What plinious wrote was a dismissal of the problem by alluding to the extreme cases (equitable climate) and assuming that's all there is to it. According to his dismissive argument there is nothing in between.  We, as in anyone alive today,  will not see a "stable'  equitable climate in our  lifetime. The transition from a planet like ours to a stable equitable will probably take thousands of years. What we are guaranteed to see is the atmospheric patterns to change from what we had to whatever the new thermodynamics of a warmer planet dictate.

The Atmospheric cells do not have to shift to an equitable climate for us to feel major change. they only needs to be disturbed enough to change climates all over the world.   A few kilometers higher latitude, a little more meandering of the vortex, can create tipping points that change the climate in entire continents.


This is already happening. I don't understand why people keep pretending it is not.




I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.