2016 sea ice area and extent data

[magnamentis]

two and a half century gain in the Antarctic ocean

a) thanks for the values, always longing for them to keep my excel sheet up to date LOL very much   
    appreciated.

b) if i didn't miss something entirely that sentence above could be meant to read "loss" instead of
    gain, if i'm the one who missed it i'm sorry to have mentioned it :-)

have a good day, cheers

[Wipneus]

Thanks for noticing, it was a typo of course:  gain->loss of Antarctic sea ice.

[Wipneus]

Update of the global sea ice graphs. Global sea ice area and extent are still in uncharted territory.
As the graphs seem to me (comments welcome) getting presentable, I gave them a place on the web, updated daily:

Global Sea Ice Area
Global Sea Ice Extent

[Tealight]

Update of the global sea ice graphs. Global sea ice area and extent are still in uncharted territory.
As the graphs seem to me (comments welcome) getting presentable, I gave them a place on the web, updated daily:

Global Sea Ice Area
Global Sea Ice Extent

Great work for your 3000 post. Congratulations!

I do not expect 2016 to climb much higher towards the other years. All gains in the Arctic will be compensated by losses in the Antarctic. It probably stays level for a further 1-2 weeks and then slowly begins the downward trend.

[johnm33]

Wipneus Thanks for all your great work here it's much appreciated. Since you ask for comment, it seems to me that this is the first time this graph appears to be communicating anything, but what? Would it be possible to 'normalise' the daily average in both hemispheres to zero then have the n/s, +/- showing as blue/red [purple] above and below the zero line in narrow columns? I hesitate to ask, since you already do so much.

[Pmt111500]

Quick estimate (eyeblling) of the sd currently on the global graph is something like -4 1/3 if thats what was asked (bullshitting every now and then keeps a man sane and gets him elected)

[dnem]

These new graphs by Wipneus strike me as among the most compelling climate change images I have ever seen, anywhere.  They appear to me to indicate an unprecedented state change in the global climate system.  Is that overstating the case?  I have been sharing them and will continue doing so but I want to provide the proper context for them.

[Pmt111500]

...indicate an unprecedented state change in the global climate system.  Is that overstating the case?

Certainly there are preciously few properly done graphs on such a large area with that magnitude a change. If we wish to use a sort of statistical maximum stating "once is a fluke, twice in a row is notable, thrice is a new state", we'd be quite happy to say this is a one time occurrence. On the cell (in a bar) so can't really write a novel on this quite expectable wacc-scrnario so stopping here.

(Modded next day: This was my 666th post on the forum, made after ~6 pints of beer, if anyone's counting, seeking further sixes from yesterday, it looks like I drove pretty exactly 6km, and walked ~1/6th of ye olde peninkulma. this karmic occurrence of the most imperfect number though breaks in the fact that I wrote a whole ten comments in total yesterday. Phew!!)

[Tigertown]

These new graphs by Wipneus strike me as among the most compelling climate change images I have ever seen, anywhere.  They appear to me to indicate an unprecedented state change in the global climate system.  Is that overstating the case?  I have been sharing them and will continue doing so but I want to provide the proper context for them.

Hard to tell until the sun comes back up in the Arctic. The anomalies hurt right now, but if they persist with the sun adding to it all, everything can change.

But then again, I could be wrong.

"But, if leading scientists writing in one of the most respected academic journals are right, planet Earth could be on course for global warming of more than seven degrees Celsius within a lifetime." Says the following article.
www.independent.co.uk/news/science/climate-change-game-over-global-warming-climate-sensitivity-seven-degrees-a7407881.html

[Ninebelowzero]

These new graphs by Wipneus strike me as among the most compelling climate change images I have ever seen, anywhere.  They appear to me to indicate an unprecedented state change in the global climate system.  Is that overstating the case?  I have been sharing them and will continue doing so but I want to provide the proper context for them.

If peak to trough values are maintained next year then sea ice area will drop to around 15m km2.

[Darvince]

On the best source I have available for Antarctic IJIS, the current sea ice extent of 15.44 M km^2 is 500k km^2 below the record set in 1986.

Btw, is there an FTP source where you can get the exact numbers?

[Lord M Vader]

Darvince: ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/south/daily/data/SH_seaice_extent_nrt_v2.csv

and: ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/south/daily/data/

For the early years, numbers are seen for every second day in the data set.

Best, LMV

[BornFromTheVoid]

Update for the week to November 12th

The current 5 day trailing average is on 8,433,000km2 while the 1 day extent is at 8,616,000km2.

(All the following data is based on a trailing 5 day average)
The daily anomaly (compared to 81-10) is at -1,891,000km2, a decrease from -2,380,000km2 last week. The anomaly compared to the 07, 11 and 12 average is at -753,000km2, a decrease from -1,130,000km2 last week. We're currently lowest on record, the same as last week.



The average daily change over the last 7 days was +131.6k/day, compared to the long term average of +61.7k/day, and the 07, 11 and 12 average of +77.8k/day.
The average long term change over the next week is +68.0k/day, with the 07, 11, and 12 average being +80.2k/day.



The extent increase so far this November is the 2nd largest on record. To achieve the largest gain, an increase of at least 85.5k/day is required (at least +84.7k/day with with single day values), while the smallest gain requires a loss of at least 8.1k/day (more than 20.5k/day with single day values) and an average gain requires an increase of 40.3k/day (33.9k/day with single day values).

[Adam Ash]

Interesting to see that PIOMAS Sea Ice Volume is about to fall out the bottom of the curve set too...

http://psc.apl.uw.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/schweiger/ice_volume/BPIOMASIceVolumeAnomalyCurrentV2.1_CY.png

[Wipneus]

Global area and extent are still venturing in this uncharted territory.

Attached are the already introduced "by year" plots. The grey shading is the +/- 2sigma range calculated from the 1981-2010 normals.

New are the normalized anomaly plots. Normalized meaning anomaly is divided by the standard deviation. I will attach them in the next post as they need a click.

Both area and extent are now a staggering 10 sigma below normal value.

[Wipneus]

see above. Do click to see the full width.

[EDIT: both graphs showed area. Fixed the extent graph]

[magnamentis]

Global area and extent are still venturing in this uncharted territory.

Attached are the already introduced "by year" plots. The grey shading is the +/- 2sigma range calculated from the 1981-2010 normals.

New are the normalized anomaly plots. Normalized meaning anomaly is divided by the standard deviation. I will attach them in the next post as they need a click.

Both area and extent are now a staggering 10 sigma below normal value.

thanks a lot, those are really meaningful numbers, btw i tried to plot those values into an excel file but did not find a comma separated or similar data file, but found a site where one has to register for data downloads. is that the place to fetch data from to plot them or is there another way.

i would be grateful for any hint, no tutorial needed, only initial directions where to look for and/or the point that i overlooked according to the above mentioned. perhaps another software is needed?

TIA

[dnem]

That is astounding Wipneus.  The probability of a 10 sigma event is essentially zero.  Which means to me that what is occurring now is being drawn from a different distribution than the historical numbers. I.e. a "state change".

[oren]

The global sea ice anomaly is shocking. Normally I would run to show it to anyone I know. My only problem with it is that Arctic and Antarctic sea ice behave differently and represent different things. Arctic sea ice is a proxy for global warming and arctic amplification, while the Antarctic behaves more randomly and is lost mostly by El Nino, and is actually predicted to gain by global warming due to increased meltwater discharge from Antarctic glaciers. So bunching them together is not so much good science in my opinion, and was mostly done by deniers claiming there was no problem with sea ice while ignoring the fundamentals.
Not intending to criticize, as this chart is very interesting, just reminding folks about the meaning of it.

[dnem]

That's a great point Oren and I've been debating how to frame it if and when I share it.  Scribbler has a good and cautious post about it today.

https://robertscribbler.com

[dnem]

But still. TEN sigma 

[DrTskoul]

At the same time the global ice amount is an earth system state property so it is not really unscientific. Granted it is a number that depends on multiple phenomena that can be on or out of phase but the span that Wip presents encompasses multiple ENSO state flips, although not enough PDO state ones. 10 sigma though is 10 sigma!!! Enough to accept a new fundamental particle ....

[wanderer]

What does this mean regarding Albedo?!

[magnamentis]

The global sea ice anomaly is shocking. Normally I would run to show it to anyone I know. My only problem with it is that Arctic and Antarctic sea ice behave differently and represent different things. Arctic sea ice is a proxy for global warming and arctic amplification, while the Antarctic behaves more randomly and is lost mostly by El Nino, and is actually predicted to gain by global warming due to increased meltwater discharge from Antarctic glaciers. So bunching them together is not so much good science in my opinion, and was mostly done by deniers claiming there was no problem with sea ice while ignoring the fundamentals.
Not intending to criticize, as this chart is very interesting, just reminding folks about the meaning of it.

the global sea ice represents very well the state of the global climate, in the long run a warmer climate will lead to less to zero ice ( around the year ) and a cooler climate will lead to an ice age with a third of the planet covered by ice. in this context it think that global sea-ice is indeed the right long-term indicator when it comes to the state of the planet and the differences you mentioned are more of a different way how that shows short term.

the reason why i predicted for years that there will be a mid-long-term turnaround in the antarctic as well is simply due to the fact that if the planet will be 5C warmer there will be no more sea ice in summer on both sides and once the land ice masses will be heavily reduced, also on both ends, even though that may take centuries if not millenia to get down to zero or close to zero as it has been in the past and who knows what kind of events will happen in the mean time.

i say global sea-ice VOLUME is the ultimate way to measure what's happening long term, short term outliers to both sides on both ends are hype and have to be interpreted with care.

again this is more as an add on to your post because as i know form many of your posts i agree to your general way to see things and very much appreciate your well founded contributions :-)

cheers

[Observador]

Hello to All, this is the first time I write in this forum.

I have been following the freezing season with interest and I have been shocked by the graphs by Wipneus on the Global area and extent anomalies.

I have a question: If there is much lesser ice than previous years, does it have an impact on sea level? Can we see it?

Thanks.

[Neven]

Welcome, Observador. Those graphs are for sea ice which floats on water, so if it melts, it doesn't raise sea level (only by a very tiny bit, having to do with salinity, I believe). Archimid can probably explain it better. I believe he came up with the concept. 

[magnamentis]

Hello to All, this is the first time I write in this forum.

I have been following the freezing season with interest and I have been shocked by the graphs by Wipneus on the Global area and extent anomalies.

I have a question: If there is much lesser ice than previous years, does it have an impact on sea level? Can we see it?

Thanks.

somewhere it has been mentioned that see level rose by 15mm recently which would indeed be a significant acceleration. i think i've heard that in a recent documentary on german television but am not totally sure, could as well be a read in this very forum.

in reply to you question that would mean "yes"

[Tigertown]

Land ice like glaciers or ice sheets raise sea level upon melting. Also, Antarctica's ice shelves because of their great heights above the water. Warming of the waters in the oceans also raise sea levels. What I have learned that most impressed me is that for various reasons sea level increases are greater in some areas of the world than others.

[magnamentis]

Land ice like glaciers or ice sheets raise sea level upon melting. Also, Antarctica's ice shelves because of their great heights above the water. Warming of the waters in the oceans also raise sea levels. What I have learned that most impressed me is that for various reasons sea level increases are greater in some areas of the world than others.

yeah, for us mere mortals this might sound like a paradoxon and it could as well have something to do with this phenomenon (links) :

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20335-earth-is-shaped-like-a-lumpy-potato/

https://www.google.es/search?q=earth%2Bpotato&num=100&tbm=isch&imgil=dQo-WDH2Qnw52M%253A%253BF3q4i0dlYiqLvM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fkingnewsmedia.blogspot.com%25252F2011%25252F04%25252Fgravity-satellite-yields-potato-earth.html&source=iu&pf=m&fir=dQo-WDH2Qnw52M%253A%252CF3q4i0dlYiqLvM%252C_&usg=__KpFNQp3P4WiAMO65trMMKUdHCkA%3D&biw=1676&bih=930#imgrc=dQo-WDH2Qnw52M%3A



https://www.google.es/search?q=earth%2Bpotatoe&oq=earth%2Bpotatoe&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.5123j0j1&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

[jdallen]

Hello to All, this is the first time I write in this forum.

I have been following the freezing season with interest and I have been shocked by the graphs by Wipneus on the Global area and extent anomalies.

I have a question: If there is much lesser ice than previous years, does it have an impact on sea level? Can we see it?

Thanks.

somewhere it has been mentioned that see level rose by 15mm recently which would indeed be a significant acceleration. i think i've heard that in a recent documentary on german television but am not totally sure, could as well be a read in this very forum.

in reply to you question that would mean "yes"

Need to qualify that "YES".

Ice melting in the Arctic will not raise sea level.

Ice *melt* from land-based ice will raise sea level, and most of that contribution is from Antarctica and Greenland.

Heat in the environment will also raise sea level through thermal expansion - that's actually a very sizeable fraction of of our current increases in sea level. (Note: steric rise pertains to changes driven by expansion from heating)

https://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg1/411.htm#tab111

[Apocalypse4Real]

Wipneus,

What is the base period for your global sea ice extent and area anomaly graphs?

They are very impressive - and disturbing.

Mind if I share them in a course I teach?

A4R

[Lord M Vader]

Todays daily extent number from NSIDC shows a staggering drop of -147K(!) It's not without that you wondr if this is the biggest single November drop from NSIDC during the whole period with daily values. Anyone who knows?

The 5-day average also did a 2K drop.

[BornFromTheVoid]

Todays daily extent number from NSIDC shows a staggering drop of -147K(!) It's not without that you wondr if this is the biggest single November drop from NSIDC during the whole period with daily values. Anyone who knows?

The 5-day average also did a 20K drop.

Previous largest singe day extent drop for November is -138k on the 16th, 1996.

For the 5 day mean there has only been 2 previous drop in November, -4.6k on 21st 1982 and -14.2k on the 8th 2013. The drop this year is just 2k for now.

[Wipneus]

Wipneus,

What is the base period for your global sea ice extent and area anomaly graphs?

They are very impressive - and disturbing.

Mind if I share them in a course I teach?

A4R

Hi A4R. Good you asked the question. Normals and standard deviation are calculated over the years 1981-2010, following NSIDC practise. I am always happy to share them, go ahead.
I did notice that the standard deviation that I used is not the correct one, it is the deviation from a linear trend over the period. Using the correct one (deviation from the mean value) yields a slightly larger value, resulting in approximately 8 sigma.
I have an update as soon as possible.

[Wipneus]

Updated graphics, here are the global sea ice area and extent per year:

[Wipneus]

Normalized anomalies, with the fixed calculation of the std, deviation.

Click for bigger pictures.

[Wipneus]

Last addition, area/extent, normal and anomaly in one graph Cryosphere Today-style.

[Juan C. García]

It looks rather odd the actual NSIDC Charctic graph, noticing that it is based on a 5-days average.   

[Wipneus]

The graphs that I presented above will be updated daily and can be found here:


https://sites.google.com/site/arctischepinguin/home/sea-ice-extent-area/grf/nsidc_global_area_byyear_b.png
https://sites.google.com/site/arctischepinguin/home/sea-ice-extent-area/grf/nsidc_global_extent_byyear_b.png
https://sites.google.com/site/arctischepinguin/home/sea-ice-extent-area/grf/nsidc_global_area_normanomaly.png
https://sites.google.com/site/arctischepinguin/home/sea-ice-extent-area/grf/nsidc_global_extent_normanomaly.png
https://sites.google.com/site/arctischepinguin/home/sea-ice-extent-area/grf/nsidc_global_area.png
https://sites.google.com/site/arctischepinguin/home/sea-ice-extent-area/grf/nsidc_global_extent.png

My calculated Global Sea Ice area and extent data are here:
https://sites.google.com/site/arctischepinguin/home/sea-ice-extent-area/data/nsidc_global_nt_final+nrt.txt.gz
https://sites.google.com/site/arctischepinguin/home/sea-ice-extent-area/data/nsidc_global_nt_final_and_nrt.txt.gz
Look at the header of the file for details.

(Bad choice to include a '+' in the filename. Google Sites gets a hiccup from it.)

[pdjakow]

Last addition, area/extent, normal and anomaly in one graph Cryosphere Today-style.

Are these graphs normalized as title said?

[Wipneus]

Last addition, area/extent, normal and anomaly in one graph Cryosphere Today-style.

Are these graphs normalized as title said?

No, title is incorrect. Fixed now, thanks for the notice.

[magnamentis]

Hello to All, this is the first time I write in this forum.

I have been following the freezing season with interest and I have been shocked by the graphs by Wipneus on the Global area and extent anomalies.

I have a question: If there is much lesser ice than previous years, does it have an impact on sea level? Can we see it?

Thanks.

somewhere it has been mentioned that see level rose by 15mm recently which would indeed be a significant acceleration. i think i've heard that in a recent documentary on german television but am not totally sure, could as well be a read in this very forum.

in reply to you question that would mean "yes"

Need to qualify that "YES".

Ice melting in the Arctic will not raise sea level.

Ice *melt* from land-based ice will raise sea level, and most of that contribution is from Antarctica and Greenland.

Heat in the environment will also raise sea level through thermal expansion - that's actually a very sizeable fraction of of our current increases in sea level. (Note: steric rise pertains to changes driven by expansion from heating)

https://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg1/411.htm#tab111

that was a misunderastanding (or failure to point out a few things on my side) :-)

a) i know that only land based ice would increas sea-level

b) he asked whether the recent global events are showing and global included the arctic hence
there is land ice to melt and there is greenland.

but then you are right, he was talking about global extent and area and only that won't have an impact other than that warmer waters have a higher volume.

so in short, i wanted to answer his question as to whether SLR accellerates which seems to be a yes for recently and i failed to point out what you pointed out with your post, thanks for jumping in.

[nowayout]

a) i know that only land based ice would increas sea-level

Sorry folks, but it seems that something here goes the wrong direction, not only in this statement.

First: a floating iceberg shows only a fraction of its volume above sea level. I don't have the exact number at hand, but let's say it is 10%.

Second: Let us give a crude model of the Antarctic maritime glaciers. A column of 500 meter of frozen ice would support  exactly 50 additional meter of ice above sea level without affecting the global sea level.

Any inch more can (and will) add to the global sea level. And I'm quite sure, on average the ice above sea level in the Antarctic exceeds the assumed 10%.

Third: Now, how will it develop in the Antarctic. The maritime glaciers are melting from underneath as we speak. And the additional volume of ice is being hold by a dome of ice which will eventually fail, collapse, and add additional frozen ice to the ocean volume.

Effectively immediately, to borrow from a different discourse.

I can't resist:

[Tigertown]

I think that usually the way the thinking goes is that water expands when frozen and thus the sea ice loses volume upon melting. This excess volume and the percentage of ice that floats above the water offset each other, if not perfectly, then close enough to a negligible deficit.

As far as Antarctica, as I mentioned above, there is land ice, ice shelves, and sea ice. The first two contribute to sea level rise upon melting. The sea ice floats the same as all sea ice. Sometimes people mix up the shelves with the sea ice, but it's not the same.

And yes, if glacier ice or ice shelves fall in the ocean and become ice bergs, these immediately raise sea level. No need to wait for melting to do so.

[Apocalypse4Real]

Wipneus,

Thanks for the anomaly clarification and the tremendous contribution to tracking global ice change.

I haven't looked at the data, but it appears from the graph that we are already below the low global sea ice levels of September, which appears to be a month early than the naturally occurring global decline for Antarctic summer..

A4R

[AbruptSLR]

It looks like the WunderBlog also admires Wipeneus' graphs per the linked article entitled: "Crazy Cryosphere: Record Low Sea Ice, An Overheated Arctic, and a Snowbound Eurasia":

https://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/crazy-cryosphere-record-low-sea-ice-an-overheated-arctic-and-a-snow

Extract: "Experts agree that the laggard sea ice this month around Antarctica is a separate matter from the Arctic, because sea ice in the northern and southern polar regions is produced by two markedly different circulation regimes and geographies. “At NSIDC, we generally frown on the practice of looking at the global sea ice extent,” said Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center, “the reason being that ice in the two hemispheres tends to behave rather differently; while Arctic extent shows clear downward trends in all months, the pattern for the Antarctic has been much more complex.” Serreze and several other ice experts I contacted agreed that there was no obvious explanation for why sea ice extent would suddenly dip in unison in both the Arctic and Antarctic when the two processes are typically so uncorrelated. Previous record-warm years didn’t behave this way. Could some previously dormant or absent connection be popping up just now? If so, it’s not an obvious one. NSIDC’s Ted Scambos: “I’d say that to link the two poles with a single causality chain at the seasonal/annual level is probably about a decade of research in the future.”"

[BornFromTheVoid]

Another drop on the daily NSIDC extent, takes us to lowest on record by well over 1 million km2 now, and gives us the biggest drop in the 5 day running average for November on record.
Will post more detail a little later.

[Wipneus]

Global extent, calculated from NSIDC sea ice concentration, has a triple century drop today. Global area goes similar with a triple and a near-triple century in the last two days.

So moving fast out of known territory with the anomaly increasing at warp speed now 0.3 sigma/day

                                                    normalized normalized
                global   global    global    global     global     global
         date   extent     area  ext.anom area.anom   ext.anom  area.anom
2016-11-09T12   23.667   17.179    -3.316    -4.323     -6.475     -7.652
2016-11-10T12   23.475   17.138    -3.483    -4.322     -6.724     -7.639
2016-11-11T12   23.422   17.242    -3.512    -4.175     -6.710     -7.340
2016-11-12T12   23.230   17.281    -3.676    -4.089     -6.944     -7.144
2016-11-13T12   23.040   17.074    -3.827    -4.243     -7.137     -7.372
2016-11-14T12   22.964   16.868    -3.860    -4.392     -7.092     -7.578
2016-11-15T12   22.840   16.791    -3.935    -4.407     -7.118     -7.545
2016-11-16T12   22.707   16.629    -4.013    -4.503     -7.148     -7.649
2016-11-17T12   22.419   16.334    -4.236    -4.723     -7.434     -7.973
2016-11-18T12   22.108   16.050    -4.473    -4.922     -7.730     -8.275

 

[Pmt111500]

<clip>

So moving fast out of known territory with the anomaly increasing at warp speed now 0.3 sigma/day
 
<clip>

Fubar. No doubt will rise to near acceptable levels at some point in time but is it feb-2017 or feb-20017 is anybody's guess. But at least we won't have to worry about glacials.

[Shared Humanity]

Last freeze season was very exciting. This one is riveting. Thanks to everyone here. I visit every day.