Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: 2016 sea ice area and extent data  (Read 488831 times)

Juan C. García

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1471
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 470
  • Likes Given: 498
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #100 on: March 29, 2016, 04:45:05 PM »
A big century drop almost certainly ends the march to the top, and starts the race to the bottom.

Not latest on record...  :'(  ;)

True...but only by a day. ...


According to NSIDC, the latest on record is April 2,2010:

"The date of the maximum has varied considerably over the years, occurring as early as February 24 in 1996 and as late as April 2 in 2010."

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2015/03/
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.

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • *****
  • Posts: 7146
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 702
  • Likes Given: 461
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #101 on: March 29, 2016, 04:48:12 PM »
According to NSIDC, the latest on record is April 2,2010:

"The date of the maximum has varied considerably over the years, occurring as early as February 24 in 1996 and as late as April 2 in 2010."

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2015/03/

Yes, but that's for NSIDC SIE. We were talking about CT SIA.

It's interesting to note that, despite occurring a full 40 days after last year's maximum, 2016 nevertheless has roughly 200,000 square kilometers less area today than on the same day last year.

That's why I 'wanted' it to be latest. Lowest and latest is a cool combination, as in freaky.

Thanks for the image. Very nice.
Il faut comparer, comparer, comparer, et cultiver notre jardin

Juan C. García

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1471
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 470
  • Likes Given: 498
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #102 on: March 29, 2016, 04:55:58 PM »
According to NSIDC, the latest on record is April 2,2010:

"The date of the maximum has varied considerably over the years, occurring as early as February 24 in 1996 and as late as April 2 in 2010."

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2015/03/

Yes, but that's for NSIDC SIE. We were talking about CT SIA.

It's interesting to note that, despite occurring a full 40 days after last year's maximum, 2016 nevertheless has roughly 200,000 square kilometers less area today than on the same day last year.

That's why I 'wanted' it to be latest. Lowest and latest is a cool combination, as in freaky.

Thanks for the image. Very nice.

Thanks for the clarification. It is true, this year had a very interesting ASI freezing season.
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.

magnamentis

  • Guest
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #103 on: March 29, 2016, 05:19:07 PM »
first high below 13k, know it's not good as per climate development but it's a first for the records and hence further puts deniers into bad light which is good. facts once more prevail over illusions (or bad intentions)

oren

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4422
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 850
  • Likes Given: 1270
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #104 on: March 29, 2016, 06:00:10 PM »
A big century drop almost certainly ends the march to the top, and starts the race to the bottom.

From today's NSIDC sea ice concentration data I calculate sea ice area, in the Cryosphere Today way. Here "day" is the day that CT normally publishes that data for the Northern Hemisphere, SH and global normally follow the next day. "CT-date" is approximately the date that CT uses.
When NSIDC does not revise its concentration data (they do occasionally), my values are normally accurate withing a few k. Uncertainties are the exact algorithm for assumed concentration in the pole hole and some subtleties handling bad data.

day  CT-date       NH               SH                Global
Tue 2016.2356   +8.2 12.899085 +111.1  3.600973  +119.2 16.500058
Wed 2016.2384  +22.1 12.921232 +120.3  3.721245  +142.4 16.642477
Thu 2016.2411 -124.4 12.796836 +104.9  3.826190   -19.5 16.623026

In attached delta map, bright red (blue) indicates the concentration goes below (above) the 15% mark. Pinkish (blueish) colors when the concentration decreases (increases) by more than 7%.

Big drops in the Barents section and Okhotsk region.

Barents gave and Barents took away. Blessed be Barents...

Wipneus

  • Citizen scientist
  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3990
    • View Profile
    • Arctische Pinguin
  • Liked: 602
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #105 on: March 30, 2016, 04:49:48 PM »
Another century drop brings CT-area 260k below the max, now quite certain the final one.

From today's NSIDC sea ice concentration data I calculate sea ice area, in the Cryosphere Today way. Here "day" is the day that CT normally publishes that data for the Northern Hemisphere, SH and global normally follow the next day. "CT-date" is approximately the date that CT uses.
When NSIDC does not revise its concentration data (they do occasionally), my values are normally accurate withing a few k. Uncertainties are the exact algorithm for assumed concentration in the pole hole and some subtleties handling bad data.

day  CT-date       NH               SH                Global
Wed 2016.2384  +22.1 12.921232 +120.3  3.721245  +142.4 16.642477
Thu 2016.2411 -124.3 12.796913 +104.9  3.826190   -19.4 16.623103
Fri 2016.2438 -137.1 12.659838  +55.2  3.881395   -81.9 16.541233

In attached delta map, bright red (blue) indicates the concentration goes below (above) the 15% mark. Pinkish (blueish) colors when the concentration decreases (increases) by more than 7%.

Big drops in the Barents section: Barents, CAB and Kara.

Lord M Vader

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1261
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 26
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #106 on: March 30, 2016, 09:06:06 PM »
Wipneus, if the most recent GFS 12z run is correct, St Lawrence should see warm temperatures in the range of 0-10oC through the weekend before the cold Arctic blast arrives. The fragile ice there should get a few really tough days there.

Btw, Berings Sea might see some ice transport into nowhere as northerly winds may be persistent there for a week or so..


Jim Pettit

  • Global Moderator
  • Nilas ice
  • *****
  • Posts: 1177
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 40
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #107 on: March 30, 2016, 09:35:51 PM »
...Another century drop brings CT-area 260k below the max, now quite certain the final one.

Yes, it does. If those two decreases happen, 2016 will be back in first place (lowest) for the day. Of greater interest, 2016 will have reached its maximum just one day later than did 2012--though 2016 will have roughly  than a million square kilometers of ice less than 2012 did on the same date. That's--obviously--quite a head start...

Wipneus

  • Citizen scientist
  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3990
    • View Profile
    • Arctische Pinguin
  • Liked: 602
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #108 on: March 31, 2016, 05:31:21 PM »
CT-area will drop Saturday further by -39k.

NSIDC is more interesting today, dropping -162k.

Regionally the drop is mostly in St.Lawrence and the ocean of Newfoundland (part of the Baffin region), with a share of -140k!

Here are the numbers for regional extent and area:

Regional Arctic Sea Ice Extent and Area calculated from NSIDC NASA Team concentration data
Date: 2016-03-30 12:00  Values in 1000 km^2  Anomalies are from the 1981-2010 mean values

Extent (value, one day change, anomaly):
   Central Arctic Basin       East Siberian Sea              Laptev Sea
  4394.2  -17.1   -60.9    935.1   +0.0    +0.0    733.9   +0.0    +0.0
               Kara Sea             Barents Sea           Greenland Sea
   879.5  -12.3   -19.1    378.8   -4.6  -500.4    566.8   +6.2  -206.0
Baffin/Newfoundland Bay            St. Lawrence              Hudson Bay
  1364.1  -42.5    +3.5     53.7  -97.1   -99.7   1230.5   +0.0    +0.1
   Canadian Archipelago            Beaufort Sea             Chukchi Sea
   747.0   +0.0    +0.0    527.6   +0.0    +0.0    602.9   +0.0    +0.0
             Bering Sea          Sea of Okhotsk                   Lakes
   666.3   -3.0  -108.1    902.7  +19.9   -56.7    253.1  +19.2   +48.3
          Other regions       Total (ex. lakes)
   179.3  -11.8   -61.3  14162.4 -162.3 -1108.6

Area (value, one day change, anomaly):
   Central Arctic Basin       East Siberian Sea              Laptev Sea
  4242.4   -4.0  -136.3    917.0   -0.3    +1.4    714.4   -2.5    +4.3
               Kara Sea             Barents Sea           Greenland Sea
   780.7  -22.7   -72.4    197.0   +0.6  -480.0    397.1   +4.8  -165.2
Baffin/Newfoundland Bay            St. Lawrence              Hudson Bay
  1090.9   -9.4   -15.5     16.4  -30.5   -57.1   1150.5   +6.5    +0.7
   Canadian Archipelago            Beaufort Sea             Chukchi Sea
   721.9   -2.8    +5.8    518.6   +2.8    +7.9    599.0   -0.6   +17.0
             Bering Sea          Sea of Okhotsk                   Lakes
   432.3   +4.3  -102.4    581.0   +8.2   -73.4    146.1  +15.8   +13.5
          Other regions       Total (ex. lakes)
    58.3   -5.2   -54.6  12417.6  -50.9 -1119.9



And the delta map, bright red (blue) indicates the concentration goes below (above) the 15% mark. Pinkish (blueish) colors when the concentration decreases (increases) by more than 7%.


Jim Pettit

  • Global Moderator
  • Nilas ice
  • *****
  • Posts: 1177
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 40
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #109 on: April 01, 2016, 02:33:15 PM »
ADS-NIPR Extent:
13,496,200 km2 (31 March)
Down 446,307 km2 (3.2%) from 2016 maximum of 13,942,507 km2 on 29 February.
10,318,745 km2 above record minimum extent of 3,177,455 km2 (16 September 2012).
Down 64,721 km2 (-.48%) from previous day.
Down 365,837 km2  (-2.64%) over past seven days (daily average: -52,262 km2).
Down 446,307 km2  (-3.65%) for March (daily average: -14,397 km2).
777,590 km2 below 2000s average for this date.
566,852 km2 below 2010s average for this date.
161,940 km2 below 2015 value for this date.
1,034,607 km2 below 2012 value for this date.
Lowest year-to-date (01 January - 31 March) average.
2nd lowest March monthly average.
Lowest value for the date.
36 days this year (40% year-to-date) have recorded the lowest daily extent.
27 days (30%) have recorded the second lowest.
14 days (15.56%) have recorded the third lowest.
77 days in total (85.56%) have been among the lowest three on record.



CT Area:
12,658,473 km2 (31 March [Day 0.2439])
Down 262,885 km2 (2.03%) from 2016 maximum of 12,921,358 km2 on 29 March [Day 0.2384].
10,424,464 km2 above record minimum area of 2,234,010 km2 (14 September 2012).
Down 138,455 km2 (-1.08%) from previous day.
Down 168,121 km2 (-1.31%) over past seven days (daily average: -24,017 km2).
Down 117,354 km2 (-1.05%) for March (daily average: -3,786 km2).
731,603 km2 below 2000s average for this date.
567,563 km2 below 2010s average for this date.
331,673 km2 below 2015 value for this date.
1,047,931 km2 below 2012 value for this date.
Lowest year-to-date (Day 0.0000 - Day 0.2439) average.
Lowest March monthly average.
Lowest value for the date.
52 days this year (57.78% year-to-date) have recorded the lowest daily area.
17 days (18.89%) have recorded the second lowest.
11 days (12.22%) have recorded the third lowest.
80 days in total (88.89%) have been among the lowest three on record.

Today's fun facts:

1) Today marks the first time both extent and area have been 1,000,000 million square kilometers below 2012's same day readings.

2) The maximum extents for 2015 and 2016 were basically identical, coming in at 13,942,060 km2 and 13,942,507 km2, respectively. That's a difference of just 447km2, or roughly the size of Winnipeg, Canada. Put another way, 2016's maximum was just 0.003% higher than 2015's.




« Last Edit: April 01, 2016, 03:03:58 PM by Jim Pettit »

Espen

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3250
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 175
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #110 on: April 01, 2016, 06:48:09 PM »
And for the first time below 13,500,000 km2 in March (13,496,200 km2 (31 March))
Have a ice day!

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • *****
  • Posts: 7146
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 702
  • Likes Given: 461
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #111 on: April 01, 2016, 08:17:39 PM »
CT SIA has noted 5 century breaks so far, together with 2007 the highest number of century breaks in the 2007-2016 record.
Il faut comparer, comparer, comparer, et cultiver notre jardin

Juan C. García

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1471
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 470
  • Likes Given: 498
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #112 on: April 02, 2016, 10:58:10 PM »
One courious thing about NSIDC Charctic graph is that it is comparing April 2, 2006 with April 1, 2016. I would say that this happens because 2016 is a leap year. So today it looks that 2006 and 2016 are even. With this tendency, I believe that for NSIDC, tomorrow 2016 will be first on record.

Year          Apr 1     Apr 2      Apr 3
2006      14,232  14,241   14,235
2016      14,241

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.

ktonine

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 363
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #113 on: April 03, 2016, 12:25:11 AM »
One courious thing about NSIDC Charctic graph is that it is comparing April 2, 2006 with April 1, 2016. I would say that this happens because 2016 is a leap year.

The spring equinox fell on March 20th in both 2006 and 2016.  2016's vernal equinox fell about 14 hours earlier than 2006's - so leap year should have little effect

Juan C. García

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1471
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 470
  • Likes Given: 498
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #114 on: April 03, 2016, 01:33:51 AM »
One courious thing about NSIDC Charctic graph is that it is comparing April 2, 2006 with April 1, 2016. I would say that this happens because 2016 is a leap year.

The spring equinox fell on March 20th in both 2006 and 2016.  2016's vernal equinox fell about 14 hours earlier than 2006's - so leap year should have little effect

If you make a table by the day of the year, April 2, 2006 and April 1, 2016 will be day 92 of the year. 2006 will have 365 days and 2016 will have 366 days.
I haven´t check it, but it is posible that graphs like Charctic will only use the first 365 days in any year, so it will disregard Dic 31 on all leap years. I will check it later.
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.

Juan C. García

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1471
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 470
  • Likes Given: 498
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #115 on: April 03, 2016, 02:47:06 AM »
Leap years (like 2004, 2008 and 2012) have an extra day at the end of the graph. So, on the Charctic, NSIDC compares day 92 with day 92, but it does not adjust the graph to compare April 1st., 2006 (not leap year) with April 1st., 2016 (leap year).

Edit: Being April 1st April fools, It is ok that 2006 and 2016 look even, but their are not.  ;D
« Last Edit: April 03, 2016, 03:42:07 AM by Juan C. García »
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.

ktonine

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 363
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #116 on: April 03, 2016, 10:51:59 AM »
Leap years (like 2004, 2008 and 2012) have an extra day at the end of the graph. So, on the Charctic, NSIDC compares day 92 with day 92, but it does not adjust the graph to compare April 1st., 2006 (not leap year) with April 1st., 2016 (leap year).

Edit: Being April 1st April fools, It is ok that 2006 and 2016 look even, but their are not.  ;D

Juan - my point is that calendar dates are not important; it's the equinoxes and solstices that determine the insolation.  We should compare by these dates regardless of calendar date or leap year.

Juan C. García

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1471
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 470
  • Likes Given: 498
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #117 on: April 03, 2016, 05:54:44 PM »
The true is that the form in which the leap years are manage will always be problematic, so it is just knowing the form in which the sources manage the leap years, to clearly understand their graphs.
There are other things that concern me more. After the huge melt that ASI had on September 2007, the Director of NSIDC Mark Serreze gave a conference at the American Geophysical Union (AGU). He recognized that he was expecting an ice-free Arctic by 2030. He said that the melt will accelerate and he talked about the possibility that 2007 was the year of the tipping point.
We have a new impressive record at 2012. We also have two years similar to 2007: 2011 and 2015. So, why the NSIDC show a linear trend, like if we have 40 or 50 years more? If scientific people of NSIDC expressed their concern of IPCC models at 2006, before the melt of 2007, why they have say nothing on the new IPCC models? Why we have a new definition of ice-free Arctic, in which we need 5 consecutive years of SIE under 1 million km2 to consider that the world is experience a ice-free Arctic? Why humanity keeps talking about extent, when we should agree that what matters is volume and the tendency of volume is an immediate colapse?
So, the big proportion of the humans will be surprise, when the governments will make official that Climate Change is not going to melt the Arctic Sea Ice at 2100, but in 1 to 10 years.
I understand your point about the equinoxes and solstices, but what I think is that as community, it is more important that we push to make everybody understand that the Arctic Sea Ice has less than 10 years to disappear.

2007 Mark Serreze conference at AGU: http://www.agu.org/webcast/fm07/Serreze/index.html

Edit: Pardon my English  :( Corrections and addendums in Italic.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2016, 07:20:40 AM by Juan C. García »
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.

Jim Pettit

  • Global Moderator
  • Nilas ice
  • *****
  • Posts: 1177
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 40
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #118 on: April 04, 2016, 02:39:35 PM »
ADS-NIPR Extent:
13,447,985 km2 (03 April)
Down 494,522 km2 (3.55%) from 2016 maximum of 13,942,507 km2 on 29 February.
10,270,530 km2 above record minimum extent of 3,177,455 km2 (16 September 2012).
Up 3,228 km2 (.02%) from previous day.
Down 352,092 km2  (-2.55%) over past seven days (daily average: -50,299 km2).
Down 48,215 km2  (-.39%) for April (daily average: -16,072 km2).
747,246 km2 below 2000s average for this date.
540,242 km2 below 2010s average for this date.
96,810 km2 below 2015 value for this date.
1,027,163 km2 below 2012 value for this date.
Lowest year-to-date (01 January - 03 April) average.
Lowest April to-date average.
Lowest value for the date.
39 days this year (41.94% year-to-date) have recorded the lowest daily extent.
27 days (29.03%) have recorded the second lowest.
14 days (15.05%) have recorded the third lowest.
80 days in total (86.02%) have been among the lowest three on record.


CT Area:
12,532,279 km2 (03 April [Day 0.2521])
Down 389,079 km2 (3.01%) from 2016 maximum of 12,921,358 km2 on 29 March [Day 0.2384].
10,298,270 km2 above record minimum area of 2,234,010 km2 (14 September 2012).
Down 58,005 km2 (-.46%) from previous day.
Down 358,490 km2 (-2.78%) over past seven days (daily average: -51,213 km2).
Down 126,194 km2 (-1.13%) for April (daily average: -42,065 km2).
795,145 km2 below 2000s average for this date.
610,679 km2 below 2010s average for this date.
449,670 km2 below 2015 value for this date.
946,886 km2 below 2012 value for this date.
Lowest year-to-date (Day 0.0000 - Day 0.2521) average.
Lowest April to-date average.
Lowest value for the date.
55 days this year (59.14% year-to-date) have recorded the lowest daily area.
17 days (18.28%) have recorded the second lowest.
11 days (11.83%) have recorded the third lowest.
83 days in total (89.25%) have been among the lowest three on record.

BornFromTheVoid

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 998
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #119 on: April 04, 2016, 04:42:20 PM »
Update for the week to April 2nd

The current 5 day mean is on 14,193,000km2 while the 1 day extent is at 14,124,000km2.

The daily anomaly (compared to 81-10) is at -1,063,590km2, an increase from -875,990km2 last week. The anomaly compared to the 07, 11 and 12 average is at -453,470km2, an increase from -198,530km2 last week. We're currently lowest on record, up from 6th lowest last week.



The average daily change over the last 7 days was -41.3k/day, compared to the long term average of -14.5k/day, and the 07, 11 and 12 average of -4.9k/day.
The average long term change over the next week is -32.7k/day, with the 07, 11, and 12 average being -28.5k/day.



The extent drop so far this April is the 7th largest record. To achieve the largest monthly loss, a drop of at least 53.5k/day is required, while the smallest loss requires a drop of less than 20.5k/day and an average loss requires a drop of 34.9k/day.



The extent change in March was the 16th most negative on record, while the average extent was the 2nd lowest on record.




Jim Pettit

  • Global Moderator
  • Nilas ice
  • *****
  • Posts: 1177
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 40
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #120 on: April 06, 2016, 02:12:59 PM »
ADS-NIPR Extent:
13,408,667 km2 (05 April)
Down 533,840 km2 (3.83%) from 2016 maximum of 13,942,507 km2 on 29 February.
10,231,212 km2 above record minimum extent of 3,177,455 km2 (16 September 2012).
Down 11,253 km2 (-.08%) from previous day.
Down 288,676 km2  (-2.11%) over past seven days (daily average: -41,239 km2).
Down 87,533 km2  (-.72%) for April (daily average: -17,507 km2).
724,246 km2 below 2000s average for this date.
496,527 km2 below 2010s average for this date.
84,157 km2 below 2015 value for this date.
883,909 km2 below 2012 value for this date.
Lowest year-to-date (01 January - 05 April) average.
Lowest April to-date average.
Lowest value for the date.
41 days this year (43.16% year-to-date) have recorded the lowest daily extent.
27 days (28.42%) have recorded the second lowest.
14 days (14.74%) have recorded the third lowest.
82 days in total (86.32%) have been among the lowest three on record.


CT Area:
12,490,260 km2 (05 April [Day 0.2576])
Down 431,098 km2 (3.34%) from 2016 maximum of 12,921,358 km2 on 29 March [Day 0.2384].
10,256,251 km2 above record minimum area of 2,234,010 km2 (14 September 2012).
Down 20,014 km2 (-.16%) from previous day.
Down 431,098 km2 (-3.37%) over past seven days (daily average: -61,585 km2).
Down 168,213 km2 (-1.51%) for April (daily average: -33,643 km2).
807,178 km2 below 2000s average for this date.
598,135 km2 below 2010s average for this date.
354,999 km2 below 2015 value for this date.
976,908 km2 below 2012 value for this date.
Lowest year-to-date (Day 0.0000 - Day 0.2576) average.
lowest April to-date average.
Lowest value for the date.
57 days this year (60% year-to-date) have recorded the lowest daily area.
17 days (17.89%) have recorded the second lowest.
11 days (11.58%) have recorded the third lowest.
85 days in total (89.47%) have been among the lowest three on record.




Wipneus

  • Citizen scientist
  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3990
    • View Profile
    • Arctische Pinguin
  • Liked: 602
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #121 on: April 06, 2016, 05:36:26 PM »
My CT-area-like calculation results in -360k, while NSIDC gives a +128k increase. These figures are caused by some flaw in the SSMIS data as can be seen by the attached NSIDC browse image.

No information from NSIDC I have seen. I got  an email from osi-saf this morning about the situation:
Quote
OSI SAF Service Message #1227

o Title :
Missing sector in OSI SAF sea ice products

o Product :
Sea Ice

o Date :
2016-04-06

o From :
 MET Norway Local Manager

o Message :
The OSI SAF sea ice products distributed this morning (labelled 20160405)
have a sector of missing data due to SSMIS data outage yesterday. The data
provider (NOAA) is looking into the problem. Service message will follow
when we have more news from NOAA.

Antarctic data is similarly affected.

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • *****
  • Posts: 7146
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 702
  • Likes Given: 461
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #122 on: April 06, 2016, 06:20:15 PM »
But Wip, does that mean the -360K is wrong, or is the +128K wrong?  :)
Il faut comparer, comparer, comparer, et cultiver notre jardin

magnamentis

  • Guest
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #123 on: April 06, 2016, 06:24:02 PM »
But Wip, does that mean the -360K is wrong, or is the +128K wrong?  :)

the +128 are wrong, the glitches produce mesh ice over open waters LOL

AmbiValent

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 136
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #124 on: April 07, 2016, 10:12:18 AM »
That would be open water at and near the North Pole, so I guess the increase is the correct data (this time).
Bright ice, how can you crack and fail? How can the ice that seemed so mighty suddenly seem so frail?

magnamentis

  • Guest
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #125 on: April 07, 2016, 11:13:06 AM »
of course i don't mean that over ice but that over open waters like the norwegian cost north of northcape there is definitely no increase of that scale

This link is for extent, but then that extent curve as well shows clearly that there cannot be an increase in area of that scale while the extent droped like this. i just linked this because the images are as per april 5th and that one is as of yesterday when the question arose  8) ;)

http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,230.msg73244.html#new
« Last Edit: April 07, 2016, 11:20:11 AM by magnamentis »

charles_oil

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 299
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 34
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #126 on: April 07, 2016, 11:52:35 AM »
NSIDC now seems to have 14.119km2 on the 4th and 14.084 on the 5th - so a drop of .035 - but the image shows a large triangle of undefined.

Maybe it will get sorted in a day or two...

ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/pub/DATASETS/nsidc0081_nrt_nasateam_seaice/browse/north/nt_20160405_f17_nrt_n.png

Wipneus

  • Citizen scientist
  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3990
    • View Profile
    • Arctische Pinguin
  • Liked: 602
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #127 on: April 07, 2016, 12:35:56 PM »
Indeed. Calculation of CT-like area gives now +110k and NSIDC extent -66k5. Since they are both based on the same faulty data, they will both be affected. Some correction will follow today if/when correct data for the next day is processed and used to fill in the gap. Perhaps more data can be restored.

Osi-saf message today says:
Quote
o Message :
The OSI SAF sea ice products are back to nominal production today, after
the missing SSMIS data from NOAA yesterday.


Jim Pettit

  • Global Moderator
  • Nilas ice
  • *****
  • Posts: 1177
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 40
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #128 on: April 08, 2016, 03:16:54 PM »
CT SIA has released it's numbers for 0.2631, and, as Wipneus suggested, they are rather odd, showing a one-day increase of 139k, the largest jump since the second week of January, the fifth largest since last November, and--remarkably if not believably, the second largest one-day increase ever recorded in April (which itself was a correction from a one-day "drop" the day before of 396k). So, will there be an offsetting/correcting decrease reflected in the upcoming numbers? Only time will tell, but I'd put money on it...

In other news: IJIS extent has now shown a decrease on 16 of the past 17 days, a rare (if not unheard of) feat so close to the annual maximum...

Buddy

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3325
  • Go DUCKS!!
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 40
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #129 on: April 08, 2016, 04:09:41 PM »

Quote
In other news: IJIS extent has now shown a decrease on 16 of the past 17 days, a rare (if not unheard of) feat so close to the annual maximum...

That is rather "eye popping".  And just one more indication as to how bad of shape the ice is in..... :'(


FOX (RT) News....."The Trump Channel.....where truth and journalism are dead."

DavidR

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 731
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 30
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #130 on: April 08, 2016, 04:38:33 PM »
CT SIA has released it's numbers for 0.2631, and, as Wipneus suggested, they are rather odd, showing a one-day increase of 139k, the largest jump since the second week of January, the fifth largest since last November, and--remarkably if not believably, the second largest one-day increase ever recorded in April (which itself was a correction from a one-day "drop" the day before of 396k). So, will there be an offsetting/correcting decrease reflected in the upcoming numbers? Only time will tell, but I'd put money on it...

In other news: IJIS extent has now shown a decrease on 16 of the past 17 days, a rare (if not unheard of) feat so close to the annual maximum...
If you think that  is strange you should see the latest  NSIDC figures which  suggest  an increase  of over 1.000,000 Km ^2. I think it  is time to go and see a good movie and come back on Monday
Toto, I've a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore

Wipneus

  • Citizen scientist
  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3990
    • View Profile
    • Arctische Pinguin
  • Liked: 602
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #131 on: April 08, 2016, 05:09:20 PM »
Indeed, my CT-area-like calculation results in an increase of more than 600k and a new maximum of 13.11 Mm2.  That may change still if the data is corrected before CT does its calculation.

Here is my delta image, bright red (blue) indicates the concentration goes below (above) the 15% mark. Pinkish (blueish) colors when the concentration decreases (increases) by more than 7%.

If the SSMIS instrument on the F17 DMSP satellite is failing, are there immediate replacements?

magnamentis

  • Guest
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #132 on: April 08, 2016, 05:52:54 PM »
In my opinion such obviously false data should not be published in the first place. It looks like nobody is in charge to pull the plug before such data goes online. Having a rest and coming back later is probably the right thing to do. Cheers LOL

Jim Hunt

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4288
    • View Profile
    • The Arctic sea ice Great White Con
  • Liked: 271
  • Likes Given: 27
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #133 on: April 08, 2016, 05:58:47 PM »
If the SSMIS instrument on the F17 DMSP satellite is failing, are there immediate replacements?

F-19 is dead already, but F-18 carries SSMIS I believe?
Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one - Albert Einstein

Juan C. García

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1471
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 470
  • Likes Given: 498
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #134 on: April 08, 2016, 06:30:04 PM »
CT SIA has released it's numbers for 0.2631, and, as Wipneus suggested, they are rather odd, showing a one-day increase of 139k, the largest jump since the second week of January, the fifth largest since last November, and--remarkably if not believably, the second largest one-day increase ever recorded in April (which itself was a correction from a one-day "drop" the day before of 396k). So, will there be an offsetting/correcting decrease reflected in the upcoming numbers? Only time will tell, but I'd put money on it...

In other news: IJIS extent has now shown a decrease on 16 of the past 17 days, a rare (if not unheard of) feat so close to the annual maximum...
If you think that  is strange you should see the latest  NSIDC figures which  suggest  an increase  of over 1.000,000 Km ^2. I think it  is time to go and see a good movie and come back on Monday

NSIDC graph  ::) :
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.

Tor Bejnar

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2996
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 321
  • Likes Given: 171
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #135 on: April 08, 2016, 08:08:21 PM »
This NSIDC graph provides "better news" than the graph that showed a one-day virtual melt out.

Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

jdallen

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3019
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 185
  • Likes Given: 171
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #136 on: April 08, 2016, 09:16:56 PM »
BOTHER.  Failing instruments with no clear replacement to provide data.

The results the instrument is providing are obviously flawed.  Just looking at Worldview suggests that to me.

Never a good time for this, but absolutely one of the worst times it could happen.
This space for Rent.

Jim Pettit

  • Global Moderator
  • Nilas ice
  • *****
  • Posts: 1177
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 40
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #137 on: April 09, 2016, 04:22:06 PM »
ADS-NIPR Extent:
13,237,712 km2 (08 April)
Down 704,795 km2 (5.06%) from 2016 maximum of 13,942,507 km2 on 29 February.
10,060,257 km2 above record minimum extent of 3,177,455 km2 (16 September 2012).
Down 71,544 km2 (-.54%) from previous day.
Down 223,544 km2  (-1.66%) over past seven days (daily average: -31,935 km2).
Down 258,488 km2  (-2.11%) for April (daily average: -32,311 km2).
782,989 km2 below 2000s average for this date.
566,792 km2 below 2010s average for this date.
149,318 km2 below 2015 value for this date.
908,238 km2 below 2012 value for this date.
Lowest year-to-date (01 January - 08 April) average.
Lowest April to-date average.
Lowest value for the date.
44 days this year (44.9% year-to-date) have recorded the lowest daily extent.
27 days (27.55%) have recorded the second lowest.
14 days (14.29%) have recorded the third lowest.
85 days in total (86.73%) have been among the lowest three on record.


CT Area:
12,504,183 km2 (08 April [Day 0.2657])
Down 417,175 km2 (3.23%) from 2016 maximum of 12,921,358 km2 on 29 March [Day 0.2384].
10,270,173 km2 above record minimum area of 2,234,010 km2 (14 September 2012).
Down 127,710 km2 (-1.01%) from previous day.
Down 117,257 km2 (-.93%) over past seven days (daily average: -16,751 km2).
Down 154,290 km2 (-1.39%) for April (daily average: -19,286 km2).
705,398 km2 below 2000s average for this date.
498,895 km2 below 2010s average for this date.
255,063 km2 below 2015 value for this date.
658,947 km2 below 2012 value for this date.
Lowest year-to-date (Day 0.0000 - Day 0.2657) average.
Lowest April to-date average.
Lowest value for the date.
59 days this year (60.2% year-to-date) have recorded the lowest daily area.
18 days (18.37%) have recorded the second lowest.
11 days (11.22%) have recorded the third lowest.
88 days in total (89.8%) have been among the lowest three on record.


Wipneus

  • Citizen scientist
  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3990
    • View Profile
    • Arctische Pinguin
  • Liked: 602
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #138 on: April 10, 2016, 04:23:12 PM »
Problems with the SSMIS data (dmsp f17) continue. In the north the Sea of Okhotsk is showing a lot of false ice. That is peanuts compared with the south, where the CT-area-like calculation is showing a massive bump of +1160k.

Jim Pettit

  • Global Moderator
  • Nilas ice
  • *****
  • Posts: 1177
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 40
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #139 on: April 10, 2016, 05:43:48 PM »
Problems with the SSMIS data (dmsp f17) continue. In the north the Sea of Okhotsk is showing a lot of false ice. That is peanuts compared with the south, where the CT-area-like calculation is showing a massive bump of +1160k.

Maybe it was just really cold yesterday. ;-) I'm not even bothering to update my CT SIA graphs and stats, as the numbers are so screwy. CT says NH ice area has shown 881k movement over the past three days; no sense in disseminating such absurdly incorrect data.

In the meantime, IJIS extent continues its recordbreaking ways, having fallen--in fact, the word "plummeted" is probably warranted given the time of year--18 of the past 19 days for a net loss of 782k, or about 41k per day. IOW, 2016 is--so far, anyway, special.

Juan C. García

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1471
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 470
  • Likes Given: 498
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #140 on: April 10, 2016, 05:49:38 PM »
Problems with the SSMIS data (dmsp f17) continue. In the north the Sea of Okhotsk is showing a lot of false ice. That is peanuts compared with the south, where the CT-area-like calculation is showing a massive bump of +1160k.

IJIS:

13,151,679 km2(April 9, 2016)

Quote
"Beaufort under early pressure" from Neven's Blog
http://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2016/04/beaufort-under-early-pressure.html#more

It is great to read on this Forum and be aware that the SSMIS data is having problems, so the increase at NSIDC SIE is not real, IJIS is first on record, at the same time that knowing that the Beaufort is under early pressure, so what is true is that the extent is falling.

I want to congratulate the Forum group, for all the work that you have been doing these years.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2016, 06:33:34 PM by Juan C. García »
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.

magnamentis

  • Guest
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #141 on: April 10, 2016, 07:03:24 PM »
I can only recommend to use these from time to time to verify data and become aware of flawed platforms:

They and more of that kind can be found here: https://sites.google.com/site/arctischepinguin/home/amsr2/grf

jdallen

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3019
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 185
  • Likes Given: 171
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #142 on: April 10, 2016, 08:02:54 PM »
Looking at IJIS, based on the 4/10's numbers (13151679)

Average loss since 2007 inclusive between this date and mimimum is approximately (rounded to thousands) 9.421 million KM2.  This gives us as a midpoint for 2016's minimum of 3.73 million KM2 - solidly 2nd lowest and flirting with 2012.

There really isn't enough data to produce sensible statistical boundaries (Standard Dev), so instead
 here's what the numbers look like, subtracting annual losses from this date to minimum from IJIS' data, when applied to the current 4/10/2016 SIE.  7 out of 13 years beat 2007, and 3 would put us near or below 2012.

YearLossApplied to current
SIE (4/10/2016)
200383558314795848
200480055425146137
200584552944696385
200676820785469601
200794003773751302
200896437043507975
200989601064191573
201096653343486345
201194313263720353
2012109195462232133
201391848233966856
201487821694369510
201591753273976352
This space for Rent.

Meirion

  • New ice
  • Posts: 59
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #143 on: April 11, 2016, 10:22:21 AM »
jdallen - I've borrowed your numbers and Espen's latest IJIS chart to Tweet (@MeirionTweets) that there is a one in four chance of new record sea ice low in September based on last decade's melts.

Jim Pettit

  • Global Moderator
  • Nilas ice
  • *****
  • Posts: 1177
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 40
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #144 on: April 11, 2016, 01:21:29 PM »
Looking at IJIS, based on the 4/10's numbers (13151679)

Average loss since 2007 inclusive between this date and mimimum is approximately (rounded to thousands) 9.421 million KM2.  This gives us as a midpoint for 2016's minimum of 3.73 million KM2 - solidly 2nd lowest and flirting with 2012.

There really isn't enough data to produce sensible statistical boundaries (Standard Dev), so instead
 here's what the numbers look like, subtracting annual losses from this date to minimum from IJIS' data, when applied to the current 4/10/2016 SIE.  7 out of 13 years beat 2007, and 3 would put us near or below 2012.

YearLossApplied to current
SIE (4/10/2016)
200383558314795848
200480055425146137
200584552944696385
200676820785469601
200794003773751302
200896437043507975
200989601064191573
201096653343486345
201194313263720353
2012109195462232133
201391848233966856
201487821694369510
201591753273976352

FYI, I've long maintained a daily graph helping to visualize these very numbers:





Tor Bejnar

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2996
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 321
  • Likes Given: 171
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #145 on: April 11, 2016, 04:05:42 PM »
Thanks, Jim, for doing so. 

This graph, among many other wonderful graphs, is accessible through Neven's ASI Graphs page - link at the top of this page.  (Several types of graphs [and maps] have their own pages - see the links at the top of the ASI Graphs page.)
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

DavidR

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 731
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 30
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #146 on: April 11, 2016, 04:13:50 PM »
NSIDC figures show another massive jump today. If we get another massive fall tomorrow it  may  be a message from Batman that he's working on saving the ice.
Toto, I've a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore

Wipneus

  • Citizen scientist
  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3990
    • View Profile
    • Arctische Pinguin
  • Liked: 602
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #147 on: April 11, 2016, 04:45:08 PM »
Yes, extent up +756k, CT-area +652k. Latest maximum on record.


Wipneus

  • Citizen scientist
  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3990
    • View Profile
    • Arctische Pinguin
  • Liked: 602
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #148 on: April 11, 2016, 04:52:25 PM »
OSI-SAF are making the switch, latest service message:

Quote
o Message :
Due to the previously reported problems with one of the channels on SSMIS
onboard DMSP F17, OSI SAF is now working on replacing DMSP F17 with DMSP
F18 in our sea ice products.

Currently, the switch to F18 has been implemented for the ice concentration
product (OSI-401). The product dated 20160410 has been reprocessed and is
available on our FTP server, ftp://osisaf.met.no/prod/ice/conc/ and
ftp://osisaf.met.no/archive/ice/conc/2016/04

The ice edge and type products (OSI-402 and OSI-403) will be updated to use
F18 tomorrow, 2016-04-12.

The ice emissivity product (OSI-404) has been temporary turned off.
Production will be upgraded to F18, with expected implementation 19th
April.

The LR ice drift product (OSI-405) does not use the channel with
calibration problems, but is affected to some extent since it uses the ice
edge product to define areas with ice. This product will be back to nominal
as soon as the ice edge product is updated.

o Comments or Extra information :
We are sorry for the inconvenience these problems might have caused. We
will report on the quality of the products with the new sensor as soon as
more data are available.
More information on www.osi-saf.org

jdallen

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3019
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 185
  • Likes Given: 171
Re: 2016 sea ice area and extent data
« Reply #149 on: April 12, 2016, 05:31:14 AM »
FYI, I've long maintained a daily graph helping to visualize these very numbers:


Sorry, Jim, not meaning to undermine your contribution.  Just stating possible end points.
This space for Rent.