Author Topic: Latest PIOMAS Volume update (Read 2025229 times)

gregcharles · « **Reply #3100 on:** October 14, 2019, 08:49:26 PM »

Quote from: Neven on October 14, 2019, 05:35:11 PM

Latest update on the ASIB: PIOMAS October 2019

As always, thanks for that! Even as a frequent reader of the forum, I find that blog post to be a very helpful summary of current conditions.

I had trouble getting comments to work there, but toward the end, you say, "In the meantime, though, September Arctic-wide temperature came in 2nd lowest." Did you mean 2nd highest?

Neven · « **Reply #3101 on:** October 15, 2019, 10:51:07 AM »

Thanks for catching that. I've changed it to 'September Arctic-wide temperatures were 2nd highest on record'.

dnem · « **Reply #3102 on:** October 15, 2019, 01:59:42 PM »

I had trouble adding a comment as well. Just below the anomaly trend graph you say "This is where things get interesting. We've seen that PIOMAS has gone up steeply since the maximum."

Since the minimum?

Neven · « **Reply #3103 on:** October 15, 2019, 02:28:42 PM »

D'oh. That's what you get for not proofreading. Thanks.

I don't know what's up with the commenting. I was able to post a test comment.

Jim Hunt · « **Reply #3104 on:** October 15, 2019, 11:06:09 PM »

Quote from: dnem on October 15, 2019, 01:59:42 PM

I had trouble adding a comment as well.

I just managed to add a comment over at the ASIB:

https://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2019/10/piomas-october-2019.html?cid=6a0133f03a1e37970b0240a4df8e82200b#comment-6a0133f03a1e37970b0240a4df8e82200b

That was signing in using the "Twitter" option.

Wipneus · « **Reply #3105 on:** October 20, 2019, 12:47:27 PM »

PIOMAS has updated the gridded thickness data up to 15 October. Volume was 5.16 [1000km³], second lowest (after 2012) for the day.

Here is the animation for October thus far.

Wipneus · « **Reply #3106 on:** October 20, 2019, 12:57:57 PM »

Updated volume and volume-anomaly graphs.

Wipneus · « **Reply #3107 on:** October 20, 2019, 01:03:32 PM »

Fram volume export is still summer-low.

Wipneus · « **Reply #3108 on:** October 20, 2019, 01:05:50 PM »

Some people have use for the updated regional data files:

daily:
https://sites.google.com/site/arctischepinguin/home/piomas/data/PIOMAS-regional.txt.gz

gerontocrat · « **Reply #3109 on:** October 20, 2019, 03:07:38 PM »

Quote from: Wipneus on October 20, 2019, 01:03:32 PM

Fram volume export is still summer-low.

..... until the 11th October ?

gandul · « **Reply #3110 on:** October 20, 2019, 05:53:42 PM »

Quote from: gerontocrat on October 20, 2019, 03:07:38 PM

Quote from: Wipneus on October 20, 2019, 01:03:32 PM
Fram volume export is still summer-low.
..... until the 11th October ?

There is direct freezing as much or more than export

gerontocrat · « **Reply #3111 on:** October 20, 2019, 06:21:03 PM »

PIOMAS Volume as at 15 October 2019 5.158 km3 '000

The standard graphs and tables as I use for the JAXA extent data are attached.

Volume gain in the first half of October mostly very much below average.

2019 volume is still 2nd lowest in the satellite record, by a reduced 401 km3 (8%) ABOVE 2012, and 394 k (7%) below 2011 the 3rd lowest, and less than 2018 by 377 km3 (7%).
_______________________________________________________________
The last table is a look at projections to the next maximum. Far too early to take it seriously, although it is obvious that 2012-13 disappears from the minimum maximum possibilities, replaced by 2016-17.

2012 shown again to be an outlier
Graph vol-4 shows the impressive decadal loss trend

Juan C. García · « **Reply #3112 on:** October 24, 2019, 05:53:19 AM »

With the low ASI extent that we are having on the second half of October, I wonder how much volume we will have on October 2019.

The lowest volume? 2019 was second-lowest on September.

I cannot wait to see the new PIOMAS data.

Stephan · « **Reply #3113 on:** October 24, 2019, 07:08:42 PM »

I bet it is at least close to lowest volume, because the average thickness of the ice (calculated as volume/extent) was only 0.97 m in Sept 2019 (Sept 2018: 1.08 m, Sept 2016: 0.97 m, Sept. 2012: 1.06 m, Sept 2007: 1.53 m). With the slower refreeze in October 2019 compared to most other years I see no chance to have had a big increase in volume this month.

Wipneus · « **Reply #3114 on:** November 04, 2019, 09:20:44 AM »

PIOMAS gridded thickness data has updated. Volume calculated from thickness was 6.52[1000km3] on 31st October, third lowest for the day. 2012 and 2016 had a lower volume.

Here is the animation.

Wipneus · « **Reply #3115 on:** November 04, 2019, 09:30:19 AM »

Update volume and volume-anomaly graphs. 2012, 2016 and 2019 are very close.

Wipneus · « **Reply #3116 on:** November 04, 2019, 09:35:13 AM »

Update Fram volume export graph. The export is increasing, not quite as fast as expected.

Wipneus · « **Reply #3117 on:** November 04, 2019, 09:42:14 AM »

Thickness map, comparisons with previous years and their diff's. Click for full size.

Wipneus · « **Reply #3118 on:** November 04, 2019, 09:42:47 AM »

Some people have use for the updated regional data files:

monthly:
https://sites.google.com/site/arctischepinguin/home/piomas/data/PIOMAS-regional-monthly.txt.gz
daily:
https://sites.google.com/site/arctischepinguin/home/piomas/data/PIOMAS-regional.txt.gz

gerontocrat · « **Reply #3119 on:** November 04, 2019, 05:26:45 PM »

PIOMAS Volume as at 31 October 2019 6.518 km3 '000

The standard graphs and tables as I use for the JAXA extent data are attached.

Volume gain in October mostly well below average, a bit above average gain in the last week.

2019 volume is still 3rd lowest in the satellite record, by 101 km3 above 2012, and only 33 km3 above 2016, and less than 2018 by 709 km3.
_______________________________________________________________
The last table is a look at projections to the next maximum. Far too early to take it seriously.

jdallen · « **Reply #3120 on:** November 04, 2019, 05:40:03 PM »

Quote from: gerontocrat on November 04, 2019, 05:26:45 PM

PIOMAS Volume as at 31 October 2019 6.518 km3 '000
The standard graphs and tables as I use for the JAXA extent data are attached.

Volume gain in October mostly well below average, a bit above average gain in the last week.

2019 volume is still 3rd lowest in the satellite record, by 101 km3 above 2012, and only 33 km3 above 2016, and less than 2018 by 709 km3.
_______________________________________________________________
The last table is a look at projections to the next maximum. Far too early to take it seriously.

Volume is what I will be watching most closely this season. Already cross-referencing from the Polarstern expedition thread, we've already seen hints that we may have been overestimating it.

gerontocrat · « **Reply #3121 on:** November 04, 2019, 05:42:45 PM »

PIOMAS Volume as at 31 October 2019 6.518 km3 '000

2 more graphs

The first is the plume of projections for November using daily change in the last 10 years. In contrast with the plumes for extent and area, the plume of projections is in a very narrow range.

Next is the graph of 365 day trailing averages, reflecting the low volume in 2016, the recovery in 2017-2018, and 2019 low volumes. At the current rate it will take until spring 2021 for a new record low.

Stephan · « **Reply #3122 on:** November 04, 2019, 10:07:55 PM »

Quote from: jdallen on November 04, 2019, 05:40:03 PM

Volume is what I will be watching most closely this season. Already cross-referencing from the Polarstern expedition thread, we've already seen hints that we may have been overestimating it.

Will the experts adjust their volume estimations to the findings of the MOSAiC expeditions?

gerontocrat · « **Reply #3123 on:** November 04, 2019, 11:18:02 PM »

Quote from: Stephan on November 04, 2019, 10:07:55 PM

Quote from: jdallen on November 04, 2019, 05:40:03 PM
Volume is what I will be watching most closely this season. Already cross-referencing from the Polarstern expedition thread, we've already seen hints that we may have been overestimating it.
Will the experts adjust their volume estimations to the findings of the MOSAiC expeditions?

It is data about one small part of the Arctic for one winter. I am sure the data will be used by the modellers to test the models' outputs, along with the new satellite data. Whether this will cause the PIOMAS database to be significantly altered is a question that I guess may be highly controversial.

bbr2314 · « **Reply #3124 on:** November 10, 2019, 03:03:28 AM »

Volume gain is probably about 3,000 KM^3 at this point. That is low.

Continental snowfall mass gain is now at 750KM^3.

Snow-mass-gain is now approximately 25% of ice gain to date.

The recent average for the date (11/8) is about 500KM^3 of SWE equivalent gain on about 3,200KM^3 of ice volume growth. That is about 16% of ice gain on land, to date, in recent normals.

With SWE gain to date about 50% above normal, I think it is becoming increasingly clear that the balance of seasonal cryospheric growth does not disappear when the ice melts, at least initially -- it switches to the land. We now have 2013, 2014, 2017, 2018, and 2019 illustrating this trend in FORCE.

Ignoring this shift would be like looking at 07, 12, 16, 19, and saying the sea ice isn't dwindling to zero or near zero. It is. But the opposite is happening on land and 2018 was Greenland's first year of no net mass loss since 1972. WHY? The answer is clear. And it is really bad news for civilization. Like 100X worse than ordinary AGW or CC narrative.

Glen Koehler · « **Reply #3125 on:** November 10, 2019, 01:21:08 PM »

bbr - I, and I suspect others, would appreciate it if you would explain in more detail how the land ocean balance creates consequences for civilization. I thought I knew about the various feedback loops, but this one is new to me. Thanks for considering this request.

Shared Humanity · « **Reply #3126 on:** November 10, 2019, 05:36:46 PM »

Quote from: Glen Koehler on November 10, 2019, 01:21:08 PM

bbr - I, and I suspect others, would appreciate it if you would explain in more detail how the land ocean balance creates consequences for civilization. I thought I knew about the various feedback loops, but this one is new to me. Thanks for considering this request.

We are going to go way off topic if we discuss this here.

NH snow cover and its attendant impacts are discussed here.

https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2876.50.html#lastPost

Neven · « **Reply #3127 on:** November 10, 2019, 06:42:01 PM »

I wanted to write a PIOMAS update for the ASIB tonight, but it seems data on the PSC website hasn't been updated yet. Is that correct?

gerontocrat · « **Reply #3128 on:** November 10, 2019, 07:01:54 PM »

Quote from: Neven on November 10, 2019, 06:42:01 PM

I wanted to write a PIOMAS update for the ASIB tonight, but it seems data on the PSC website hasn't been updated yet. Is that correct?

All I can see is September

crandles · « **Reply #3129 on:** November 10, 2019, 09:13:44 PM »

Quote from: gerontocrat on November 10, 2019, 07:01:54 PM

All I can see is September

Plus Wipneus figure of

Quote from: Wipneus on November 04, 2019, 09:20:44 AM

Volume calculated from thickness was 6.52[1000km3] on 31st October, third lowest for the day. 2012 and 2016 had a lower volume.

Iain · « **Reply #3130 on:** November 11, 2019, 01:24:12 PM »

Piomas now has the Oct data.

2019 is within a whisker of 2012 and 2016 for time of year.

Iain · « **Reply #3131 on:** November 11, 2019, 01:28:14 PM »

Also worth noting the linear trend of September minimums predicts BOEs will be common in 16 years from now.

Scary.

An excursion below the trend line such as seen in 2010, 11 or 12 reduces that to 4 or 5 years from now.

Very scary.

Klondike Kat · « **Reply #3132 on:** November 11, 2019, 07:05:10 PM »

Quote from: Iain on November 11, 2019, 01:28:14 PM

Also worth noting the linear trend of September minimums predicts BOEs will be common in 16 years from now.

Scary.

An excursion below the trend line such as seen in 2010, 11 or 12 reduces that to 4 or 5 years from now.

Very scary.

True, but a polymeric trend does not yield a BOE until much later.

Phil. · « **Reply #3133 on:** November 11, 2019, 09:55:25 PM »

Quote from: Klondike Kat on November 11, 2019, 07:05:10 PM

Quote from: Iain on November 11, 2019, 01:28:14 PM
Also worth noting the linear trend of September minimums predicts BOEs will be common in 16 years from now.

Scary.

An excursion below the trend line such as seen in 2010, 11 or 12 reduces that to 4 or 5 years from now.

Very scary.

True, but a polymeric trend does not yield a BOE until much later.

A quadratic will be sooner than linear.

Klondike Kat · « **Reply #3134 on:** November 11, 2019, 10:04:29 PM »

Quote from: Phil. on November 11, 2019, 09:55:25 PM

Quote from: Klondike Kat on November 11, 2019, 07:05:10 PM
Quote from: Iain on November 11, 2019, 01:28:14 PM
Also worth noting the linear trend of September minimums predicts BOEs will be common in 16 years from now.

Scary.

An excursion below the trend line such as seen in 2010, 11 or 12 reduces that to 4 or 5 years from now.

Very scary.

True, but a polymeric trend does not yield a BOE until much later.

A quadratic will be sooner than linear.

Except that a quadratic is a poorer fit than a linear. A third-order is a better fit than either. I am not sold on the Gompertz, which never reaches zero.

Glen Koehler · « **Reply #3135 on:** November 11, 2019, 10:27:01 PM »

Not that I remember the math that well, but an X2 curve will ALWAYS give a better fit than a linear X curve. And an X3 curve will ALWAYS give a better fit than an X2 curve.

I will always treasure the moment when some new grad students showed results from a class lab experiment with six data points on an XY curve all over the place like a sneeze and got a perfect correlation with a wiggly X5 curve! Which is what has to happen when you use up every last degree of freedom.

Stephan · « **Reply #3136 on:** November 11, 2019, 10:27:40 PM »

(see my posting in the "When will the Arctic go ice free" thread from today)
My log extrapolation says 2025, the linear fit says 2032 the average September Arctic Sea Ice volume will reach zero. That is very comparable to Wipneus' extrapolation graph of the September minimum Arctic Sea Ice volume.

Phil. · « **Reply #3137 on:** November 12, 2019, 04:14:48 AM »

Quote from: Klondike Kat on November 11, 2019, 10:04:29 PM

Except that a quadratic is a poorer fit than a linear. A third-order is a better fit than either. I am not sold on the Gompertz, which never reaches zero.

No the quadratic is much better fit than the linear in this case: R^2 0.9 vs 0.4.
Gompertz has a better R^2 but its projection assumes a characteristic for which there is no evidence.

liefde · « **Reply #3138 on:** November 13, 2019, 01:05:37 AM »

The main drivers seem to be constantly disregarded in these projection graphs;
- Energy is still accumulating (by 4 Hiroshima atomic bombs worth of heat every second) globally. That heat is not going to disappear. It will reside in oceans (bottom melt) and on the surface (top melt). In addition to that greenhouse gases are expanding as well, not disappearing.
- Ice melt is contact-surface related. The smaller the surface becomes, the more it is surrounded by melt-potential. It's not a linear curve, it's an exponential one.
- The two cold poles are not separate, they are part of the same energy system. The lower the ice down South, the higher the impact up North. There are no signs either of the poles show long-term growth (and how could they?).

Wipneus · « **Reply #3139 on:** November 20, 2019, 10:56:25 AM »

PIOMAS has upgraded its gridded thickness data upto 15th November. Calculated volume at that date was 8.54 [1000km³], which is third lowest behind 2012 and 2016.

Here is the animation of the first half of November.

Wipneus · « **Reply #3140 on:** November 20, 2019, 11:13:07 AM »

Updated volume and volume-anomaly graphs.

Wipneus · « **Reply #3141 on:** November 20, 2019, 11:15:35 AM »

Fram volume export. Big negative spike on the last day can be seen in the animation above.

Wipneus · « **Reply #3142 on:** November 20, 2019, 11:17:57 AM »

Some people have use for the updated regional data files:

daily:
https://sites.google.com/site/arctischepinguin/home/piomas/data/PIOMAS-regional.txt.gz

gerontocrat · « **Reply #3143 on:** November 20, 2019, 01:17:26 PM »

Once again, this person does "have use for the updated regional data files" from Wipneus:

PIOMAS Volume as at 15 November 2019 8.540 km3 '000

The standard graphs and tables as I use for the JAXA extent data are attached.

Volume gain in 1st week of November well above average.
Volume gain in 2nd week of November well below average.

2019 volume is still 3rd lowest in the satellite record, by 467 km3 above 2012, and 612 km3 above 2016, and less than 2018 by 892 km3.
_______________________________________________________________
The last table is a look at projections to the next maximum. Far too early to take it seriously.

gerontocrat · « **Reply #3144 on:** November 20, 2019, 01:26:37 PM »

PIOMAS Volume 365 day trailing average is still going down, currently at just over a 2 km3 per day.

But is still just over 1,000 km3 above the record low in early September 2017.

IF (a big if) future daily volume stays well below that of the year before, a new record daily volume would be reached in early 2021.

gerontocrat · « **Reply #3145 on:** November 20, 2019, 02:22:13 PM »

Chukchi Volume Graph - perhaps even more impressive than the area graph.

Tor Bejnar · « **Reply #3146 on:** November 20, 2019, 02:50:19 PM »

Just a reminder of where the Chukchi Sea is (from ASI-Graphs-Regional) It's the area marked "4".

nanning · « **Reply #3147 on:** November 20, 2019, 04:02:08 PM »

Tor, the graph is not visible even when clicking on the image or 'view image'. I want to know where the Chukchi is dammit

binntho · « **Reply #3148 on:** November 20, 2019, 04:03:07 PM »

There was supposed to be an image above! But I've attached it as well:

Tor Bejnar · « **Reply #3149 on:** November 20, 2019, 05:01:24 PM »

Funny, I get the "there is an image" symbol, but I can select "Show image" then open a site to get the image. But thanks, Binntho! And Nanning, are you declaring yourself an advocate of damming the Bering Strait? [sorry about that!]

News:

Author Topic: Latest PIOMAS Volume update (Read 2025229 times)

gandul

Shared Humanity