Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: The 2016 melting season  (Read 2274251 times)

Rob Dekker

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2386
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 120
  • Likes Given: 119
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3950 on: August 13, 2016, 09:07:34 AM »
So there is a denier sight that has the following GIF comparing sea ice thickness between 2012 and 2016 on the same day in August.  Where did this come from and is it wrong?

Which "denier site" posted that ?
This is our planet. This is our time.
Let's not waste either.

werther

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 747
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 31
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3951 on: August 13, 2016, 09:11:19 AM »
As Michael wrote: "... the recent dipole which we some of us were excited about..."
You're right, I thought by last saturday compaction should start producing a significant SIE drop. But it did hardly half.
I have to consider why. For a part, the ice condition is much different from, let's say, '07. It is much more mobile, producing extent gains on the Atlantic Front when winds push in the ESS sector.
For another part, there might be not enough warmth advection from lower latitudes.
As for the next big Low, it has a different origin than GAC '12. That one came from a deep swirling Rossby Wave, taking lots of energy from the Pacific. This one just looks more like an initiation surplace. As it propagates into, or perhaps from, the 500Mb layer, it looks more like the Polar Vortex starting up early.
It will, however, still be exciting to see if dispersion, surface winds and relatively high SST's will keep the upper hand.
« Last Edit: August 13, 2016, 08:58:12 PM by werther »

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3952 on: August 13, 2016, 10:06:35 AM »
Which "denier site" posted that ?

That animation has the filthy fingerprints of Steven Goddard/Tony Heller all over it. That's all we need to know really. Last week I explained on the blog why it is safe to disregard the DMI volume graph. It's completely unrealistic, which is why Goddard/heller uses it to misinform people.
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

Michael Hauber

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1114
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 168
  • Likes Given: 16
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3953 on: August 13, 2016, 10:21:46 AM »
So there is a denier sight that has the following GIF comparing sea ice thickness between 2012 and 2016 on the same day in August.  Where did this come from and is it wrong?

I don't think its impossible.  Keep in mind:

- there are a couple different thickness models.  Presumably they have picked whichever one gives them the most favourable comparison vs 2012.  At least one of these models (Hycom) has changed since 2012, although I think that one is showing much thinner ice this year and not thicker.
- Putting a threshold of 1.5m could exaggerate the differences, and may have been cherry picked.  Imagine if in 2012 the ice is averaging about 1.4m, and in 2016 averaging 1.6m.  Not a huge difference in thickness, but the amount of ice > 1.5m might be very different.
Climate change:  Prepare for the worst, hope for the best, expect the middle.

BornFromTheVoid

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1339
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 679
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3954 on: August 13, 2016, 11:33:43 AM »
Thinking about the upcoming storm, people seem consider this year to be a cold storm and 2012 to be a warm storm. To me, there are 2 factors that matter in this regard:
  • Are the air temperatures with this storm much cooler than in 2012?
  • Do the air temperatures matter that much with late season storms?
For 1, we can compare the ECM upper air temps and see if there's much difference.

First the storms themselves

2012


2016


Both appear very similar, with 2012 being just a little more compact and closer to the Pacific than 2016.
Next, the 850hPa temps

2012


2016


The distribution of cold is quite different on the 2 storms, with 2012 having slightly more widespread cold, but less deep. 2016 is certainly a bit colder over the central Arctic, however, I'm not sure if the difference is enough to call one a warm storm and one a cold storm.

As for the importance of this cold difference, I don't think it matters much. At this time of year the main destructive action from this storm will be through waves, swells and warm water upwelling. A little rain would have helped speed up melt a bit, but I don't think the additional snowfall will help the large areas of low concentration ice much. The air is still not cold enough to produce fresh sea ice, despite being cold enough for snow over some areas and refreezing of melt ponds (dependent on the wind too).

2012 did, and 2016 will, take a direct hit to the areas with the weakest most fragmented ice of the season so I think the effects of the storms overall will be quite similar. However, 2012 had more fragile ice leading up to GAC2012, so while I expect well above average melt rates for a few days this year, I don't think we'll come close to achieving a >1,000,000km2 in 7 days like we did in 2012.

August 3rd 2012 (pre storm)


August 12th 2016
I recently joined the twitter thing, where I post more analysis, pics and animations: @Icy_Samuel

Jim Hunt

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6268
  • Don't Vote NatC or PopCon, Save Lives!
    • View Profile
    • The Arctic sea ice Great White Con
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 87
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3955 on: August 13, 2016, 03:25:42 PM »
That animation has the filthy fingerprints of Steven Goddard/Tony Heller all over it. That's all we need to know really.

It has indeed, which rather begs the question of why "Burn" poses his question here when the aforementioned "denier" simultaneously claims that "DMI Goes Full Fraud On Sea Ice".
"The most revolutionary thing one can do always is to proclaim loudly what is happening" - Rosa Luxemburg

seaicesailor

  • Guest
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3956 on: August 13, 2016, 03:27:21 PM »
IMO the pattern of accumulated drift for the next seven days will look not so different from the posted before by slow wing,

http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1493.msg86109.html#msg86109

only that way more intense and the ESS much more shaken. The accumulation of drift will be much greater than 100 km in many areas I estimate from ACNFS.

Beaufort CAB sector and the Atlantic front will be receiving new ice batches, perhaps up to 300,000 km2 combined, result of the overall divergent flow of ice. Will these melt before September minimum?
Laptev ice is so resilient, so important the past lack of albedo amplification. Thin FY ice that does not go, against extremely thick MYI completely vanished in Beaufort.
Remembering that Beaufort was cold in June with relatively late surface melt onset, and continuously importing ice due to storms. So extreme melting that was enabled mostly because of the early opened ocean
« Last Edit: August 13, 2016, 03:39:51 PM by seaicesailor »

iceman

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 285
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3957 on: August 13, 2016, 03:40:45 PM »
Iceman, just my guess but I'm guessing the ice NW of Wrangel Island will not survive the melt season. On the other hand, the ice in the Laptev Sea could separate from the main pack.
   ....

You mean the ice eastwards of Taymyr Peninsula?  Could be, and of interest because it would create a straighter Northern Sea Route, but it's relatively small compared to the detachment in 2012.

   ....
We could well see that ice toward Chukchi get separated from the main pack.

I'm keeping an eye on the high-concentration expanse NW of Wrangel that straddles ESS and CAB, which might become an ice island by the 18th or earlier.  Perhaps less likely than the ice toward Chukchi, but more comparable to 2012.

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3958 on: August 13, 2016, 03:56:10 PM »
I have just posted the latest ASI update: ASI 2016 update 5: big cyclone

Quote
Conclusion

It's very simple. This melting season would've broken the 2012 record, if the Arctic hadn't been dominated by cloudy weather almost all of June, July and August. The fact that this year is still a contender for a top 3 position, speaks volumes. But will it make it into the top 3, a question I've been asking since ASI update 3?

This very large cyclone, possibly the strongest summer cyclone on record after 2012, may give us an answer to that question. There's still a month to go before the melting season ends, but in the next few days all eyes will be on this monster storm.

Oh, and by the way, it looks as if both the Northern Sea Route and Northwest Passage will be open again.
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

Jim Pettit

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1175
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3959 on: August 13, 2016, 04:06:45 PM »
So there is a denier sight that has the following GIF comparing sea ice thickness between 2012 and 2016 on the same day in August.  Where did this come from and is it wrong?

I'm always suspicious when someone comes here and reposts nonsense from an anonymous "denier sight" without the courtesy to provide either provenance or attribution--especially when that someone  has already demonstrated a not-so-subtle denier mindset. Now, as others have pointed out, the blather posted is indeed from Tony "I Call Myself Steve Goddard For Reasons Known Only To Myself And The Voices In My Head" Heller. So I have to ask: what's the purpose of bringing intentionally misleading spittle from a dishonorable, discredited fool into an open discussion of real science? Are you just trying to get a rise with some mild trolling? Do you think so little of the good people here that you assume some will believe such baseless tripe? Or are you yourself convinced that most here--and by extension most scientists--are wrong? If it's either of the first two, shame on you. And if it's the last: why even bother?

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3960 on: August 13, 2016, 04:07:34 PM »
It has indeed, which rather begs the question of why "Burn" poses his question here when the aforementioned "denier" simultaneously claims that "DMI Goes Full Fraud On Sea Ice".

Indeed, and one also wonders how FTB ended up on that silly site, and actually takes it serious for more than 3 seconds. I thought he was an alarmist, just like us.  ;)
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

Shared Humanity

  • Guest
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3961 on: August 13, 2016, 04:30:06 PM »
On Wednesday coupled with a 1023 hpa high over Beaufort. That'd be something.

That high paired with the low should cause some serious compaction along the CAA. My guess is the Northwest route may not open this year.

seaicesailor

  • Guest
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3962 on: August 13, 2016, 04:57:13 PM »
It is refreshing to have FTB sort of comments in a while as long as it is not a crowd.
I am still haunted by the relationship between higher Sep. ASI extent and anomalous snow thickness in the Sierras in the past spring

Richard Rathbone

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1730
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 387
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3963 on: August 13, 2016, 07:09:27 PM »
It is refreshing to have FTB sort of comments in a while as long as it is not a crowd.
I am still haunted by the relationship between higher Sep. ASI extent and anomalous snow thickness in the Sierras in the past spring

Quite. There are plenty of alarmist cherry picks in this thread. No reason not to have a little corrective prod by a denialist example from time to time.


RoxTheGeologist

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 625
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 188
  • Likes Given: 149
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3964 on: August 13, 2016, 07:29:36 PM »
On Wednesday coupled with a 1023 hpa high over Beaufort. That'd be something.

That high paired with the low should cause some serious compaction along the CAA. My guess is the Northwest route may not open this year.

Isn't the southern part of the NW route already open? It was pretty close to being clear of ice by the 1st of August.
« Last Edit: August 14, 2016, 12:10:52 AM by RoxTheGeologist »

Quantum

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3965 on: August 13, 2016, 08:27:26 PM »
On Wednesday coupled with a 1023 hpa high over Beaufort. That'd be something.

That high paired with the low should cause some serious compaction along the CAA. My guess is the Northwest route may not open this year.

Isn't the southern part of the NW route was already open? It was pretty close to being clear of ice by the 1st of August.
Yes, but the northern part of the route is still closed. I added a summary of the routes and the last 4 years in the NW passage thread.

Quantum

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3966 on: August 13, 2016, 08:31:03 PM »
Would it be possible with these kind of temperatures for new ice to form in the north pole area in the next week or so? Genuinely don't know the answer to this. By extension when is the earliest new ice is possible to see? Can it happen before September?

Jim Hunt

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6268
  • Don't Vote NatC or PopCon, Save Lives!
    • View Profile
    • The Arctic sea ice Great White Con
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 87
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3967 on: August 13, 2016, 08:33:13 PM »
Isn't the southern part of the NW route was already open?

Personally I reckon so, although that does of course depend upon how you define "open":

http://GreatWhiteCon.info/2016/08/is-the-northwest-passage-open-yet-2/

From August 7th:
"The most revolutionary thing one can do always is to proclaim loudly what is happening" - Rosa Luxemburg

seaicesailor

  • Guest
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3968 on: August 14, 2016, 12:07:19 AM »
Would it be possible with these kind of temperatures for new ice to form in the north pole area in the next week or so? Genuinely don't know the answer to this. By extension when is the earliest new ice is possible to see? Can it happen before September?

Yes I think so.
That is why some of us were saying in June and July that what happened with the CAB holes this year was secondary to what happens at the edge because the holes heal quickly, while some were claiming the Arctic was going down the drain. The CAB has been well protected by clouds and coldness until July. This discarded 2016 as a record year very soon.
Beaufort sea OTOH won't be refreezing until october, and the ice that will not melt at the CAB edge will endure bottom melting until november.
While new structures of ice start forming on the open water, a floe next to it will keep melting at the bottom.

seaicesailor

  • Guest
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3969 on: August 14, 2016, 12:53:47 AM »
It is refreshing to have FTB sort of comments in a while as long as it is not a crowd.
I am still haunted by the relationship between higher Sep. ASI extent and anomalous snow thickness in the Sierras in the past spring

Quite. There are plenty of alarmist cherry picks in this thread. No reason not to have a little corrective prod by a denialist example from time to time.

I understand that, but even in the extreme cases that we might cherry-pick, it wouldn't be by resorting to second-hand pseudo-scientists lies. Nevertheless most of us we try to stay rigorous even when sometimes our passions show through.
But science is at the side of alarm when it comes to Arctic so it is relatively easy to build reasonably rigorous cases that demonstrate dangers to ice survival. Us ontributors here have typically a much better understanding (admittedly at layman level most of us) of the physical processes at stake than the usual ignorant crowd at WUWT. And yes, there is a bias, but as I said it is easy to be alarmed when whatever comes, storm or WAA, turns out bad for the ice. Climate is warming, see the yearly extent grapths that the only thing that prove is the ongoing long-term spiral of death of the ASI. This year will end up second, third, or fourth, but not seventh, ninth, eleventh.
I'd invite more realists (many here already, you won't find that at WUWT), even some deniers (with manners, with solid personal thoughts and not with the usual crowd propaganda) to participate here and make discussion more lively, but this is not my call.
FTB seemes to be a denier with manners with some personal basic thoughts, but with the last post he has discredited himself.

FishOutofWater

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1088
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 696
  • Likes Given: 332
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3970 on: August 14, 2016, 01:07:07 AM »
My reply to FTB is read the predictions of the sea ice specialists. As a group they are predicting this year to reach a minimum extent, area and volume well above 2012 for very clearly stated reasons. June insolation is critical to melting. A cloudy June means that the Arctic takes up less solar heating that a sunny June. It's pretty simple science. This year the clouds reflected more sunlight back to space than in 2012. A high school student can understand this easily.

June was cool and cloudy over the Arctic ocean therefore there was less volume loss this June than in June 2012 which was sunny.

Scientists look at decadal trends of sea ice volume loss. Scientists expect ups and downs in volume loss in response to variable weather.

The deniers are obnoxious ***holes because they play stupid games with data to confuse people. Scientists are not confused or amused by the cherry picking of data by the likes of Tony Heller.

Greenbelt

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 167
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 39
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3971 on: August 14, 2016, 01:26:46 AM »
12z ECMWF now has the cyclone re-deepening -- quite strong through day 7

slow wing

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 823
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 155
  • Likes Given: 546
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3972 on: August 14, 2016, 02:27:10 AM »
Yep, Greenbelt, you beat me to it. The new ECMWF forecast is even worse for the longevity of the storm.

Here are their predictions for minimum pressure in the Arctic Basin, at 24h intervals, taken from http://www.tropicaltidbits.com/analysis/models/?model=ecmwf&region=nhem&pkg=z500_mslp&runtime=2016081312&fh=240&xpos=0&ypos=155

987 hPa is 000h forecast for 12z Saturday, 13 August 2017
978 hPa is 024h forecast for 12z Sunday, 14 August 2017
968 hPa is 048h forecast for 12z Monday, 15 August 2017 (the overall lowest)
974 hPa is 072h forecast for 12z Tuesday, 16 August 2017
982 hPa is 096h forecast for 12z Wednesday, 17 August 2017
984 hPa is 120h forecast for 12z Thursday, 18 August 2017
984 hPa is 144h forecast for 12z Friday, 19 August 2017
974 hPa is 168h forecast for 12z Saturday, 20 August 2017
975 hPa is 192h forecast for 12z Sunday, 21 August 2017
982 hPa is 216h forecast for 12z Monday, 22 August 2017
982 hPa is 240h forecast for 12z Tuesday, 23 August 2017

The 240h prediction is as far as the ECMWF forecast goes.

The GFS forecast, however, goes all the way out to 384h (which is 17 days in the future, in this case at 18z on Monday, 29 August 2016 - presumably helpful only for the most stable of features). It broadly agrees with the ECMWF forecast for a persistent strong low pressure system out to 240h and then continues with the low pressure all the way out to its limit at 17 days! The low is predicted still at 990 hPa after 17 days, having never gone above 991 hPa beforehand - at least according to a cursory click through the forecasts.

Question for the experts: is this predicted stability plausible? Believable? If so, what are the intrinsic features that would provide for such stability.

In the scenario of a low pressure system in the centre of the Arctic Basin persisting at least until around the end of August, I'm presuming the ice would continue to circle and disperse while being eaten away by bottom melt.

Feeltheburn

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 214
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3973 on: August 14, 2016, 07:33:29 AM »
Thanks for the replies and sorry for the data bomb from the Tony Heller site.  I assumed there was a good explanation as to why the comparison was misleading and several here provided it.  I didn't mean to play a game or anything. I just assumed if I said it was from Tony Heller it would a priori be dismissed without explanation.

Just the other day I sent samples of pozzolanic materials to a sophisticated concrete company for their independent testing.  I deliberately withheld what they are for now to not bias the results based on expectations.  I am not playing games.  Just trying to get answers without undue bias.
Feel The Burn!

budmantis

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1220
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 34
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3974 on: August 14, 2016, 08:27:59 AM »
  I didn't mean to play a game or anything. I just assumed if I said it was from Tony Heller it would a priori be dismissed without explanation.

Sure looks like a game to me. Perhaps it wasn't malicious, but I was about to comment that the other members were possibly being overly critical. Obviously, I'll withhold that comment now! The best way to approach this would have been to be upfront and honest.

Rob Dekker

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2386
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 120
  • Likes Given: 119
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3975 on: August 14, 2016, 08:29:56 AM »
Just trying to get answers without undue bias.

We all are trying to get answers without undue bias. But the questions you ask matter.

If you start putting forward some stuff from a know denialist, without mentioning the source, nor attempting yourself to at least make a first attempt to debunk what he presents, why do you think that any of us here would do that work for you ?
This is our planet. This is our time.
Let's not waste either.

Andreas T

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1149
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3976 on: August 14, 2016, 09:20:29 AM »
.....
I understand that, but even in the extreme cases that we might cherry-pick, it wouldn't be by resorting to second-hand pseudo-scientists lies. Nevertheless most of us we try to stay rigorous even when sometimes our passions show through.
But science is at the side of alarm when it comes to Arctic so it is relatively easy to build reasonably rigorous cases that demonstrate dangers to ice survival. Us ontributors here have typically a much better understanding (admittedly at layman level most of us) of the physical processes at stake than the usual ignorant crowd at WUWT. And yes, there is a bias, but as I said it is easy to be alarmed when whatever comes, storm or WAA, turns out bad for the ice. Climate is warming, see the yearly extent grapths that the only thing that prove is the ongoing long-term spiral of death of the ASI. This year will end up second, third, or fourth, but not seventh, ninth, eleventh.
I'd invite more realists (many here already, you won't find that at WUWT), even some deniers (with manners, with solid personal thoughts and not with the usual crowd propaganda) to participate here and make discussion more lively, but this is not my call.
FTB seemes to be a denier with manners with some personal basic thoughts, but with the last post he has discredited himself.
I very much agree, as a group of people who have learned from discussions and the information contributed on this forum, we should not hide from discussions with people who doubt that the arctic sea ice is in as bad a shape as most here are convinced it is.
Even the appearance of dismissing a graphic out of hand because it has been presented at a site which exists to disinform should be avoided. In order to gain wider support for action to limit the rise of CO2 in the atmosphere, people need to see the dangers which they are at present reluctant to see. That means talking to people who do not already agree with us.
A challenge to explain why we are convinced of our views should be engaged with by presenting factual information.
I don't know enough about the sources of the DMI thickness graphs, but as FOW has already said the significance of volume this year (as much as we can know it) is that it is quite low in a season in which the weather has not been supporting strong melting.
2012 showed by producing such a drop in extent that volume was low (which of course was strongly doubted by the same people who now like to talk about a rebound from that low point) The continuation of a broadly downward trend will also find expression in a very obviously visible reduction of ice cover in the years to come.
My view is that the downward trend is alarming without seeing a dramatic crash this year.

Paladiea

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 106
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3977 on: August 14, 2016, 10:04:11 AM »
The storm's longevity could be due to many factors, not least of which would be some sort of ridge or a meandering of the polar jet stream that got stuck. Alternately, it could be that the polar jet stream is too weak to nudge it away...

The fragmented pack would also contribute, since heat would be escaping the ocean into the atmosphere.

On a different tack, I believe another poster mentioned that there is a track for these kinds of storms. If that is the case, then the track has a blockage now, and all we need to do is find out what that is.

I have a feeling however that the large amount of heat in the oceans surrounding the pack may also have a stabilizing effect on the low.

Well, here's to low-efficiency melting mechanisms. :)
« Last Edit: August 14, 2016, 10:09:22 AM by Paladiea »
The most enjoyable way to think about heat transfer through radiation is to picture a Star Wars laser battle, where every atom and molecule is constantly firing at every other atom and molecule.

Jim Hunt

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6268
  • Don't Vote NatC or PopCon, Save Lives!
    • View Profile
    • The Arctic sea ice Great White Con
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 87
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3978 on: August 14, 2016, 12:25:32 PM »
The central pressure of the cyclone is now down to 981 hPa. The yacht Northabout is currently attempting to sail the Northern Sea Route, and is sheltering from the storm in a (hopefully!) quiet corner of the western Laptev Sea:

http://GreatWhiteCon.info/2016/08/the-great-arctic-cyclone-of-2016/#Aug-14
"The most revolutionary thing one can do always is to proclaim loudly what is happening" - Rosa Luxemburg

slow wing

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 823
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 155
  • Likes Given: 546
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3979 on: August 14, 2016, 12:38:58 PM »
Good luck to the Northabout!

The Laptev Sea is currently getting smoked as the storm sets up in the central Arctic Basin...

slow wing

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 823
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 155
  • Likes Given: 546
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3980 on: August 14, 2016, 12:53:17 PM »
13 August is another date where Neven shows the year-to-year comparison for the University of Bremen Arctic sea ice concentration maps:
https://sites.google.com/site/arcticseaicegraphs/concentration-maps/sic0813

To my eyes, the ice looks ragged on this date for a number of years and 2012 was not yet the obvious leader. Still, the ice had an extraordinary August in 2012. It will be interesting to see the extent to which GAC-2016 does the same for 2016.

Jim Hunt

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6268
  • Don't Vote NatC or PopCon, Save Lives!
    • View Profile
    • The Arctic sea ice Great White Con
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 87
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3981 on: August 14, 2016, 12:59:23 PM »
Just trying to get answers without undue bias.

In which case I suggest you pose your questions without using material from known biased sources. Here's the output of an alternative implementation of HYCOM/CICE. Do you prefer GOFS or DMI? Which do you suppose best represents "reality"?
"The most revolutionary thing one can do always is to proclaim loudly what is happening" - Rosa Luxemburg

Richard Rathbone

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1730
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 387
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3982 on: August 14, 2016, 02:04:25 PM »
The model is irrelevant. PIOMAS would tell the same story. Its the story the graph is being used to promote and the way its been cherry picked to support that. It could be a perfectly respectable illustration of a the thinking behind an eminently reasonable opinion (there's not going to be a record this year because there's just too much relatively thick ice left compared to 2012).

If you are talking about record possibilities, 2012 is the year to use to illustrate your point. If you are talking about general trends 2012 is the year to use to illustrate your bias.

Jim Hunt

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6268
  • Don't Vote NatC or PopCon, Save Lives!
    • View Profile
    • The Arctic sea ice Great White Con
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 87
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3983 on: August 14, 2016, 02:37:55 PM »
The model is irrelevant. PIOMAS would tell the same story.

If the outputs of two ostensibly similar implementations of the same model are so different should one believe either of them?

http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,108.msg3073.html#msg3073

Quote
The CICE model is much more sensitive to forcing data than to internal model parameters.

PIOMAS doesn't tell quite the same story as DMI:
"The most revolutionary thing one can do always is to proclaim loudly what is happening" - Rosa Luxemburg

Shared Humanity

  • Guest
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3984 on: August 14, 2016, 02:54:44 PM »
Just trying to get answers without undue bias.

In which case I suggest you pose your questions without using material from known biased sources. Here's the output of an alternative implementation of HYCOM/CICE. Do you prefer GOFS or DMI? Which do you suppose best represents "reality"?

If we are to accept this model as an accurate portrayal of thickness, what should we expect to be the result from a persistent cyclone that lasts up to 7 days in an area of highly fragmented ice that is no more than a meter thick?

Thawing Thunder

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 247
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 47
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3985 on: August 14, 2016, 03:00:13 PM »
Here another 48-hours-composite from the Bremen images, August 11-13. Might give another view on melt, filtering clouds and artifacts.
« Last Edit: August 14, 2016, 09:21:14 PM by Thawing Thunder »
The Thunder was father of the first people, and the Moon was the first mother. But Maxa'xâk, the evil horned serpent, destroyed the Water Keeper Spirit and loosed the waters upon the Earth and the first people were no more.

6roucho

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 296
  • Finance geek
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3986 on: August 14, 2016, 04:47:57 PM »
Just trying to get answers without undue bias.

In which case I suggest you pose your questions without using material from known biased sources. Here's the output of an alternative implementation of HYCOM/CICE. Do you prefer GOFS or DMI? Which do you suppose best represents "reality"?

If we are to accept this model as an accurate portrayal of thickness, what should we expect to be the result from a persistent cyclone that lasts up to 7 days in an area of highly fragmented ice that is no more than a meter thick?
Do we have metrics on such a storm, apart from GAC2012?

seaicesailor

  • Guest
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3987 on: August 14, 2016, 05:02:45 PM »
Good luck to the Northabout!

The Laptev Sea is currently getting smoked as the storm sets up in the central Arctic Basin...

Anybody knows about swell predictions near the boat?
I read that swells are not usually powerful in Laptev sea except near the taymyr peninsula
https://books.google.es/books?id=jpPNDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA64&lpg=PA64&dq=swells+laptev+sea&source=bl&ots=ur_N0DRcnq&sig=3j25CMJZCTU2BBiXUWvTdBsO_kI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwibhq_rlcHOAhWGPRoKHZcRAucQ6AEIKDAB#v=onepage&q=swells%20laptev%20sea&f=false

Nick_Naylor

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 291
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3988 on: August 14, 2016, 05:26:37 PM »
How many more years before we see algae in the open water at 80N?

Jim Hunt

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6268
  • Don't Vote NatC or PopCon, Save Lives!
    • View Profile
    • The Arctic sea ice Great White Con
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 87
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3989 on: August 14, 2016, 05:37:54 PM »
Anybody knows about swell predictions near the boat?

Here's what WaveWatch III was predicting yesterday, for Monday morning. The winds are offshore at Ostrov Severnyy, so no big swells are threatening Northabout at the moment.
"The most revolutionary thing one can do always is to proclaim loudly what is happening" - Rosa Luxemburg

FishOutofWater

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1088
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 696
  • Likes Given: 332
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3990 on: August 14, 2016, 05:41:22 PM »
The boat is protected from swells by a large island according to the information Jim Hunt has posted on his blog. Normally the sea ice keeps swells from developing. The size of the swell is a function of fetch, duration and wind speed. If more open water is developed by the storm the fetch and potential swell size will increase.

It's unfortunate we don't have buoys in the right spots to get good measurements of what's happening in the ocean including Ekman pumping of warm water from depth. We can't expect to develop good models without good data.

Richard Rathbone

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1730
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 387
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3991 on: August 14, 2016, 05:58:53 PM »
The model is irrelevant. PIOMAS would tell the same story.

If the outputs of two ostensibly similar implementations of the same model are so different should one believe either of them?

http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,108.msg3073.html#msg3073

Quote
The CICE model is much more sensitive to forcing data than to internal model parameters.

PIOMAS doesn't tell quite the same story as DMI:

Plot the same graph from each source if you want to show differences, not one thing from DMI and something different from PIOMAS.

Jim Hunt

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6268
  • Don't Vote NatC or PopCon, Save Lives!
    • View Profile
    • The Arctic sea ice Great White Con
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 87
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3992 on: August 14, 2016, 06:16:22 PM »
Plot the same graph from each source if you want to show differences, not one thing from DMI and something different from PIOMAS.

I'll leave that as an exercise for the interested reader. FTB for example?
"The most revolutionary thing one can do always is to proclaim loudly what is happening" - Rosa Luxemburg

Santiago

  • New ice
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3993 on: August 14, 2016, 06:50:44 PM »
What are the different ways in which arctic sea ice can melt?

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3994 on: August 14, 2016, 11:46:38 PM »
I didn't mean to play a game or anything. I just assumed if I said it was from Tony Heller it would a priori be dismissed without explanation.

I hope you noticed that I suspected it was from pathological liar Goddard/Heller, said that this was enough to dismiss/ignore it out of hand, BUT gave you my explanation/view nonetheless. That means that from now on you can just be upfront and sincere, and give us the source of the (mis)information that you need explained.

And how on Earth did you end up at that hell hole, and not leave after reading the 'articles' and comments for 1 minute or less? WUWT is bad, but Heller/Goddard is the worst of the worst. He truly is a pathological liar who will do anything to make a buck or get attention.
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

jdallen

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3410
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 650
  • Likes Given: 244
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3995 on: August 14, 2016, 11:50:47 PM »
Anybody knows about swell predictions near the boat?

Here's what WaveWatch III was predicting yesterday, for Monday morning. The winds are offshore at Ostrov Severnyy, so no big swells are threatening Northabout at the moment.
Pitty we can't get swell information for the area under the grey mask.  The Laptev is being pushed around hard right now.  Nullschool Wind map snatch showing 40-50KPH surface winds and a worldview ice screen shot from 8/12/2016 attached. Worldview screenshot covers an area of approxmately 1 million KM2 and change.

The Worldview map even on the 12th showed significant disintegration starting to take place along the margins.  I suspect an awful lot of the already broken ice in the area will get ground into brash.

[edit:  rotate the lower image about 45 degrees clockwise to get a better sense of how the wind is crossing the ice.  Unrotated, on the Worldview image the wind is coming from the upper right crossing to the lower left, swinging around somewhere just past the lower left corner and heading back around towards Severnaya Zemlya.]
« Last Edit: August 15, 2016, 12:01:09 AM by jdallen »
This space for Rent.

Darvince

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 318
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 31
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3996 on: August 15, 2016, 12:04:39 AM »
I didn't mean to play a game or anything. I just assumed if I said it was from Tony Heller it would a priori be dismissed without explanation.
And how on Earth did you end up at that hell hole, and not leave after reading the 'articles' and comments for 1 minute or less? WUWT is bad, but Heller/Goddard is the worst of the worst. He truly is a pathological liar who will do anything to make a buck or get attention.
I'm guessing that perhaps the trap of thinking that both deniers and scientists deserve "equal time" which was quite a popular notion until recently has stuck around for some. I'll let FTB explain anything more though.

jdallen

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3410
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 650
  • Likes Given: 244
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3997 on: August 15, 2016, 12:11:39 AM »
What a difference a month makes.  Eastern Beaufort shots including the CAB off of the Northern route of the NW Passage, north and east of Banks Island, from 7/11/2016 and 8/11/2016.

That area will continue to get significant insolation for another week or so.  Highly probable the northern route of the NW Passage could open, and most of the visible ice (over 100,000KM2) will disappear.
This space for Rent.

Tor Bejnar

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4606
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 879
  • Likes Given: 826
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3998 on: August 15, 2016, 12:33:53 AM »
What are the different ways in which arctic sea ice can melt?
for a start:
direct sunshine (insolation) - melts or sublimates ice (turns into vapor)
melting is enhanced when the ice has a lower albedo [how reflective it is] due to algae, settled dust and smoke, river-borne dirt (especially in the spring where river water flows over fast ice [ice still frozen to the shore]
snow has lower albedo after a little has melted, changing the crystal structure
dry air: sublimation
heat transfer from warm air (especially with wind) or
warm water (solar heated sea water or river water), including
   water under the ice that is heated by direct sunshine (when light goes through the ice)
   flowing water (near rivers or over ocean currents) or wind-moved ice floes over still water or
   due to ekman pumping (low atmospheric pressure raises sea level and if strong enough, messes with the stratified water where denser warm water is beneath cooler less dense [less salty] water)
melt ponds on ice floes have lower albedo than ice
first year ice has higher salt content so melts faster than older ice
strong storms create waves
   break up ice creating smaller floes with more edges to melt
   flow water over floes generally lowering its albedo (especially if there was snow on top) and increasing saltiness
   increases movement of water around ice (both choppy seas and wind-sailing floes)
   ekman pumping
going south into warmer waters (due to currents and winds), especially passing Fram Strait (NE of Greenland) into the Greenland Sea and Atlantic Ocean 

PS - welcome, Santiago, to the ASIF!
« Last Edit: August 15, 2016, 01:56:04 AM by Tor Bejnar »
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things because "we cannot negotiate with the melting point of ice"

seaicesailor

  • Guest
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #3999 on: August 15, 2016, 01:02:30 AM »
I know that this model has not very good reputation, but I would like to ask: how good are these archived images? According to these maps, we are faced with the same ...

Now that we are close to the storm explosion, in fact it is already raging as we speak, the drift predictions are supposed to be better. But please keep in mind that the model has evolved and are not completely "apples to apples".
Comparing today, tomorrow (worst day) day after and one more, lower gif. Same for 2012 (6th to 9th of August, upper gif). No cherry-picking. Past these days both storms continue, similarly weakening, predictions anyway only good for these four days, no more.
Three comments: first, tomorrow drift prediction has a worse drift than shown by Sterks before, I think. Second, both 2012 and 2016 show strong divergence for similar period of time. However, third, 2012 center of storm seemed positioned in a way that did not inflate the main pack. Expect slower declines this time where the center is well within the main pack.
Oh, also it is not possible to estimate the huge amount of accumulated drift since values saturate scale (max 30 cm/s). I expect near 200 km in some places but pure speculation.