Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: The 2016 melting season  (Read 1680188 times)

F.Tnioli

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 767
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 148
  • Likes Given: 36
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2300 on: June 17, 2016, 11:53:43 AM »
...  The arctic is an incredibly complex system and each of our brains tries to break it down to simplified factors.  There's a lot going on up there that none of us understand.
Not each. There is a brain which does not do that. My brain.

I intentionally try to leave space for unknown, to account all spectre of possibilities. I am not saying that i succeed with it completely each and every time. I am only saying that i always _try_ to do that, - instead of trying what you wrote.

Also, please note that in some (far from all, but in _some_) cases - it's not needed to have complete understanding of the system in order to be able to make significant conclusions about its future state. Example: one does not need to understand how exactly snail's body and brain functions to be able to predict with certainty that said body and brain will cease to function if put into a large enough fire for long enough time. Even if one never seen any snail burned alive before. And one does not have to be a biologist who specializes on this sort of animals; however, the latter will most likely be able to correctly predict more details about how exactly the process of the snail's destruction would go on. We here are quite similar. Varying levels of knowledge and intellect allow different people to see different details, but there is some (if low) level of "obvious" pretty much everyone can agree upon and be collectively correct in such a consensus - without any need to understand that whole lot of things which are going out there.
To everyone: before posting in a melting season topic, please be sure to know contents of this moderator's post: https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,3017.msg261893.html#msg261893 . Thanks!

slow wing

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 819
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 156
  • Likes Given: 496
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2301 on: June 17, 2016, 12:00:46 PM »
I have just published a post on the ASIB, explaining why the probability of this year breaking the minimum record has gone down considerably: 2016 melting momentum, part 1
Thanks Neven, superb update as always.

I'll just mention that the evidence you present for 2016 vs. 2012 goes both ways. The atmosphere and melt ponds favour 2012 to melt out more. However, there's a big difference in the opposite direction in the sea temperature figures you present - they favour 2016 to melt out more.

In our predictions for the melt season, we're all guessing somewhat about a complex system with only partial information. Personally though, I've given a lot of weight to the higher than usual ocean heat inputs that we've seen all year. I think it is still reasonably arguable that 2016 area, extent and volume might end up below the corresponding 2012 minima - even that this is more likely than the other way around.

Either way, it's riveting and scary to see how this melt season plays out.


Gray-Wolf

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 890
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 122
  • Likes Given: 318
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2302 on: June 17, 2016, 12:38:42 PM »
Hi Slow wing!

I have just posted something similar over on another forum. We are all struggling with a 'new Arctic' and some of the new ways it works. this year we have had swathes of open water ,for over 2 months now, in areas that receive incoming 'warm waters from the Pacific/Atlantic. If these open waters are already warmed then any 'incoming' waters will lose less heat in transit and so pose a melt threat for longer?

We might not be seeing drops in extent of size to make folk go bonkers but it does not mean the ice is all sat static in the basin. Degradation has continued with both collapse and spread and basal melt for any floes entering 'warmed waters'.

The mild winter may also have left the ice closer to melt than other 'average winter temp years'.

Many Septembers have left me wondering what another 2 weeks of aggressive melt could have meant to the final numbers with some floes surely close to melt out at that point. This year we could have seen more than that '2 weeks of aggressive melt' in the conditioning that large areas of the pack have already seen ( lack of thickening/cooling/fragmentation into smaller floes/open water throughout the basin etc.) so ,to me, July and early Aug are now a very interesting watch just to see how much the pack opens up and how quickly we see large floes degrade?
KOYAANISQATSI

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

F.Tnioli

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 767
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 148
  • Likes Given: 36
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2303 on: June 17, 2016, 12:51:01 PM »
...
I think it is still reasonably arguable that 2016 area, extent and volume might end up below the corresponding 2012 minima - even that this is more likely than the other way around.
...
I think exactly the same thing. Couldn't express it better, too; rare case when every last word is both meaningful and correct (in my opinion). Well done!

That said, Neven's point is also true (that chances of new records dropped significantly after last couple weeks). I believe Neven himself sees those chances to still be substantially higher than zero, considering proper, careful wording of his most recent addition.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2016, 01:01:07 PM by F.Tnioli »
To everyone: before posting in a melting season topic, please be sure to know contents of this moderator's post: https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,3017.msg261893.html#msg261893 . Thanks!

kingbum

  • New ice
  • Posts: 35
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2304 on: June 17, 2016, 01:39:09 PM »
I know that is the thread we are on here, to discuss what will be the final outcome of this season number-wise. However, we are in a bad situation either way. Many experts believe that even if you stopped all carbon emissions now, immediately,the feedback loops already in action are self sustaining. And the impact of recently released ghgs have not even fully kicked in yet and gimmicks that prevent a ton or so of co2 is not the answer. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy hearing everybody make educated guesses about the outcome of this years melt season, but we got to remember it is only part of the picture.

Do you freshwater fish by chance? You probably don't but if you did you'd notice in many lakes a fish die off especially after a heatwave. Why is this? Simple really cold water holds dissolved gasses like CO2 and Oxygen in the water. The oceans are a giant carbon sink in other words. This premise is my biggest problem behind the whole CO2 greenhouse gas argument the fact I just stated is undeniably true you can test it out in any fish tank. Warm water releases the dissolved gasses into the atmosphere hence CO2 has to trail temperature. It is the result of warming not the cause just ask any fishermen who has seen this phenomenon. The planet has been warmer undeniably so what has caused it if not CO2? I side with the folks that say solar cycles and the sun drives the climate and the oceans. The Earth has an energy budget and the fools who think that there's is just a 1% variance on the total radiation emitted from the sun between cycles are just that fools. More and more it also appears that atmospheric compression events are happening much more frequently and its becoming clearer that Henrik Svensmark's theory on cosmic rays seeding clouds is correct. Just do an analysis of cloud cover on the planet from 2000-2015 you'd see much more cloud cover now.

jplotinus

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 127
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 14
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2305 on: June 17, 2016, 01:43:16 PM »
thanks for making it easy for us to compare those years. What is most striking is how white the floes in 2016 are. Only those which have drifted near the coast are beginning to show signs of surface melting.

Thanks a lot from me too, A-Team. I'm also surprised to see the difference in whiteness with previous years, although the Beaufort has been relatively cold and cloudy just when melt onset really kicks in.

I have just expressed my concern on the ASIB over the situation in the Beaufort Sea, given all the open water, but I might have to take some of that back if preconditioning takes so long to get going.

I'd like to second (third) these thanks to A-team.
Your post shows a great assessment of the Beaufort at this time, compared to past years, and that 2012 animation into halfway July is absolutely amazing.

It appears that in the Beaufort, 2016 is even more fragmented than 2012, which spells serious trouble down the road into July.
It also seems that these floes in 2016 are brighter than in 2012, and I wonder how much of that is simple brightness difference in the pictures, and how much is real.
MODIS does not have any 2012 pictures (something to do with their disk crash in 2013), so did you use WoldView for these comparisons ?

Also the paper you quote is very interesting. With the similar fragmentation in the Beaufort between 2012 and 2016, I can't suppress the notion that this year will develop similarly in that area of the Arctic.

On that note : Amundsen Gulf is already broken up, and ready to be flushed out.
I don not have software to make an animated GIF, but here are the images :
June 13:
https://lance.modaps.eosdis.nasa.gov/imagery/subsets/?subset=Arctic_r05c02.2016165.terra
and June 14:
https://lance.modaps.eosdis.nasa.gov/imagery/subsets/?subset=Arctic_r05c02.2016166.terra
Look how the cracks appear and the ice is loose.

All we need is some wind from the East, or current from the East, and the ice in Amundsen Gluf flushes out (before 2012 did?).

Not the best gif maker software (free app), but here goes:

JayW

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 603
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 220
  • Likes Given: 264
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2306 on: June 17, 2016, 01:50:53 PM »


The Beaufort Gyre animation for 01-14 June shows 'Big Block' almost stationary, without any suggestion of export to the Chukchi. Other areas in the Gyre seem to be dispersing into the area of coastal open water, with some indication of CW rotation.

The winds, at least on GFS-based nullschool, have called consistently for CCW rotation if anything. The observed movement of floe\s cannot be explained by inertia (as any CW momentum would be rapidly damped out) nor by background ocean currents (which are small). There seems to be no observational wind data whatsoever in this region.

I made a similar remark in post #2186. http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1493.msg80163.html#msg80163

Mean vector winds at the surface for June 1-14
"To defy the laws of tradition, is a crusade only of the brave" - Les Claypool

crandles

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2737
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 156
  • Likes Given: 55
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2307 on: June 17, 2016, 01:51:49 PM »
Warm water releases the dissolved gasses into the atmosphere hence CO2 has to trail temperature. It is the result of warming not the cause just ask any fishermen who has seen this phenomenon.

This is wrong on such a basic level. Yes warmer water holds less gasses other things being equal. The warming effect is small and therefore so is the consequent amount of CO2 released.

Oceans and land are absorbing around 50% of anthropogenic emissions and most of that is the oceans.

So if warmer water holds less dissolved CO2 but the oceans are dissolving more CO2 - might it be that the effect of more CO2 in the atmosphere is causing more CO2 to dissolve and this is a stronger effect than warm water holds less CO2?

Tigertown

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1676
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2308 on: June 17, 2016, 02:14:35 PM »
I know that is the thread we are on here, to discuss what will be the final outcome of this season number-wise. However, we are in a bad situation either way. Many experts believe that even if you stopped all carbon emissions now, immediately,the feedback loops already in action are self sustaining. And the impact of recently released ghgs have not even fully kicked in yet and gimmicks that prevent a ton or so of co2 is not the answer. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy hearing everybody make educated guesses about the outcome of this years melt season, but we got to remember it is only part of the picture.

Do you freshwater fish by chance? You probably don't but if you did you'd notice in many lakes a fish die off especially after a heatwave. Why is this? Simple really cold water holds dissolved gasses like CO2 and Oxygen in the water. The oceans are a giant carbon sink in other words. This premise is my biggest problem behind the whole CO2 greenhouse gas argument the fact I just stated is undeniably true you can test it out in any fish tank. Warm water releases the dissolved gasses into the atmosphere hence CO2 has to trail temperature. It is the result of warming not the cause just ask any fishermen who has seen this phenomenon. The planet has been warmer undeniably so what has caused it if not CO2? I side with the folks that say solar cycles and the sun drives the climate and the oceans. The Earth has an energy budget and the fools who think that there's is just a 1% variance on the total radiation emitted from the sun between cycles are just that fools. More and more it also appears that atmospheric compression events are happening much more frequently and its becoming clearer that Henrik Svensmark's theory on cosmic rays seeding clouds is correct. Just do an analysis of cloud cover on the planet from 2000-2015 you'd see much more cloud cover now.

So basically, you are saying that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas? Really!!!
"....and the appointed time came for God to bring to ruin those ruining the earth." Revelation 11:18.

Phil.

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 362
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2309 on: June 17, 2016, 02:44:07 PM »
I know that is the thread we are on here, to discuss what will be the final outcome of this season number-wise. However, we are in a bad situation either way. Many experts believe that even if you stopped all carbon emissions now, immediately,the feedback loops already in action are self sustaining. And the impact of recently released ghgs have not even fully kicked in yet and gimmicks that prevent a ton or so of co2 is not the answer. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy hearing everybody make educated guesses about the outcome of this years melt season, but we got to remember it is only part of the picture.

Do you freshwater fish by chance? You probably don't but if you did you'd notice in many lakes a fish die off especially after a heatwave. Why is this? Simple really cold water holds dissolved gasses like CO2 and Oxygen in the water. The oceans are a giant carbon sink in other words. This premise is my biggest problem behind the whole CO2 greenhouse gas argument the fact I just stated is undeniably true you can test it out in any fish tank. Warm water releases the dissolved gasses into the atmosphere hence CO2 has to trail temperature. It is the result of warming not the cause just ask any fishermen who has seen this phenomenon.

This effect occurs for O2 but not for CO2!  Dissolution of gases in water follows Henry's Law which states that at constant temperature the amount of gas dissolved is proportional to the partial pressure of the gas in the atmosphere.  In the case of O2 the pO2 is constant so the amount dissolved will follow temperature due to changes in the Henry's Law coefficient.  However it is not true for CO2 because the pCO2 is increasing faster than would be expected by temperature increase of the ocean.  Fossil fuel combustion is adding more CO2 to the atmosphere than the ocean dissolve hence the year on year increase.  If you look at Tamino's temperature plot you'll see an increase of about 1ºC since 1980 which would (if applied to the ocean surface) give an increase of at most 16ppm.
https://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/nasa_movave12.jpeg
During that time the pCO2 has increased by over 60ppm
« Last Edit: June 17, 2016, 02:52:29 PM by Phil. »

F.Tnioli

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 767
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 148
  • Likes Given: 36
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2310 on: June 17, 2016, 02:50:58 PM »
...
This premise is my biggest problem behind the whole CO2 greenhouse gas argument the fact I just stated is undeniably true you can test it out in any fish tank. ...
Congratulations on beating decades of massive athmospheric research with just few sentences of text. Except, it didn't happen. There is no argument here. The effect is well understood and described in detail. Figure 6.2 there is quite easy to comprehend, for example. Now, this is also clearly off-topic - both your post, and this post of mine. I intend to stop it right here. Please note that if you don't, then it is quite possible moderators will revoke your posting rights, temporary or permanently. Cheers!
To everyone: before posting in a melting season topic, please be sure to know contents of this moderator's post: https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,3017.msg261893.html#msg261893 . Thanks!

Tigertown

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1676
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2311 on: June 17, 2016, 03:07:41 PM »
If anyone has any more info on the rapid rate of bottom melt in the peripheral oceans reported by the DMI, would like to learn more about it.
"....and the appointed time came for God to bring to ruin those ruining the earth." Revelation 11:18.

Jim Pettit

  • Global Moderator
  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1175
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 40
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2312 on: June 17, 2016, 03:23:44 PM »
Comment paraphrased: 10,000 climate scientists are wrong; the planet is warming up by magic, not CO2.

This forum isn't the right one for denialist nonsense, and this particular thread is definitely the wrong place for it. I believe you'll find a better receptacle for it at WUWT. Cheers!

AmbiValent

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 136
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2313 on: June 17, 2016, 03:40:17 PM »
Wasn't the reason for the "trailing" CO2 something like this: Milankovic cycles cause more energy go to the north at the beginning of an interglacial, which causes ice to melt, setting free CO2 and methane, which warms up the planet further, which melts more ice and so on until a new equilibrium is reached? So the warming of the northern polar region starts earlier than the increase of the CO2. But this time, the CO2 is set free not by Milankovic cycles but by burning fossil fuels, so this time the increase is there first, and the warming follows.
Bright ice, how can you crack and fail? How can the ice that seemed so mighty suddenly seem so frail?

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 7751
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1128
  • Likes Given: 512
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2314 on: June 17, 2016, 03:57:09 PM »
I'll let the good ol' denier BS stand, as I was to late to remove it and people have replied to it now. Instead I've decided to ban Kingbum. Thanks for your patience.
Il faut comparer, comparer, comparer, et cultiver notre jardin

magnamentis

  • Guest
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2315 on: June 17, 2016, 04:13:18 PM »
after so much back and forth arguing going on for a few days since the melt was slowing down for a few days, there were repeatedly users who mentioned how extraordinarily warmer temps there were in 2012 and so on.

each time i went to see the stats to verify and always had to shake my head because not one single stat or image has been showing a 2012 that was warmer than this year (2016), except perhaps a few single days in between but generally temps in the high arctic ( >80N) were cooler in 2012.

Further, since that high up north, 1C -2C are a significant difference, i would even call it "much cooler. so now i took the time to put those images together in a time series starting in 2003 up to now, to illustrate the facts and end a least that non-sense once and for all. see for yourself: (click the image to enlarge to readable size )

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 7751
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1128
  • Likes Given: 512
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2316 on: June 17, 2016, 04:21:39 PM »
Magnamentis, that's for 80N. But if you look at this SAT anomaly map for the entire Arctic for the first two weeks of June:



Il faut comparer, comparer, comparer, et cultiver notre jardin

seaicesailor

  • Guest
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2317 on: June 17, 2016, 04:42:06 PM »
If anyone has any more info on the rapid rate of bottom melt in the peripheral oceans reported by the DMI, would like to learn more about it.

Again, I doubt it is predicting such fast bottom melt but rather the effect of storm wind drift (see pic below) that breaks up ice and separates ice floes reducing the effective thickness (or average thickness, never remember the right denomination).
Bottom melt of half a meter does not happen overnight, see an archive of buoy ice and snow thickness data (and more),
http://imb.erdc.dren.mil/buoysum.htm

What shown below indeed happens overnight! I had not noticed the huge crack and the extension of broken floes in ESS. This basically happened 2 days ago when a storm passed over.

Tigertown

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1676
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2318 on: June 17, 2016, 05:01:40 PM »
Looking at denmark satellite of sea ice and its beginning to melt more than the past week.
Yes, DMI shows bottom melt beginning with massive force across all peripheral seas. The entire ESS/Chukchi lose a uniform .5M each over 5 days! Meanwhile Kara is about to melt out entirely and the whole Atlantic periphery is starting to get blowtorched off.


This was the comment I was referring to, by the way.
"....and the appointed time came for God to bring to ruin those ruining the earth." Revelation 11:18.

Gray-Wolf

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 890
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 122
  • Likes Given: 318
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2319 on: June 17, 2016, 05:38:27 PM »


When I look at the above I cannot help but think " How does the ice compare to those other years?", where is the ice? how fragmented is it? how close is it to active melt zones?

In 2012 I had a lot of persuading to do to those who looked at the record late max that year ( Bering ice factory) and cried 'recovery!' I had to explain that once the ice outside the basin ( peripheral ice) was gone then we could look at how the ice was doing.

This year , compared to 2012, is the opposite with a very low ,early max. The million sq km lost to 2012 over this month must have had plenty of the 'easy ice' in its record fast fall whereas this year has very little 'easy ice'?

So , I'm left with us running close to 2012 ( for the time of year) and wondering how the ice/conditions of each year compare to one another?

I'm still not happy that we sit so low in the rankings and that the ice ( to me) must be in a poorer condition than others (due to 3 years of fragmentation events and the warm winter just past). If we see no change to the rates of extent /area falls over the next 6 weeks I will alter my thinking and sigh another big sigh of relief.

Until then I'm on tenterhooks!!!
KOYAANISQATSI

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

magnamentis

  • Guest
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2320 on: June 17, 2016, 05:39:11 PM »
Magnamentis, that's for 80N. But if you look at this SAT anomaly map for the entire Arctic for the first two weeks of June:

ok, that's of course a valid point, my thoughts were that most of the ice below 80N will melt out each year (not all but the best part) and then that above 80N ice quality will eventually make the difference, independently of weather related intermezzi.

still i have to admit, that since temps surrounding the arctic ocean, have generally been very warm, not all at the same time but intermittently, that i did not look at the data which you just provided, hence that's a perfect complement to round off the picture. i'm really appreciative, it makes it easier for me to understand some of the statements that, at times, i found a bit astonishing :-) :thumbup:

Nick_Naylor

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 291
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2321 on: June 17, 2016, 06:13:54 PM »
Magnamentis, that's for 80N. But if you look at this SAT anomaly map for the entire Arctic for the first two weeks of June:

Interesting. The 925mb temps are noticeably lower than 2012, but the same isn't true at 2 meters, where June looks pretty warm:

http://cires1.colorado.edu/~aslater/ARCTIC_TAIR/index_80_t2m.html

Sebastian Jones

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 408
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 105
  • Likes Given: 93
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2322 on: June 17, 2016, 07:21:42 PM »
I have just published a post on the ASIB, explaining why the probability of this year breaking the minimum record has gone down considerably: 2016 melting momentum, part 1
In your post there is some questioning around the amount of warmth flowing in through the Bering Strait. To me, this: http://pafc.arh.noaa.gov/ice.php?img=SST indicates there must be a fair amount; it is unusual to see SSTs of 3 degrees up against the ice edge unless there is a current pushing it.

epiphyte

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 385
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2323 on: June 17, 2016, 08:12:03 PM »
Magnamentis, that's for 80N. But if you look at this SAT anomaly map for the entire Arctic for the first two weeks of June:



I've never understood why a surface temperature slightly higher than freezing should necessarily be indicative of faster melt than one of exactly freezing, in the presence of an ice/water mix. Shouldn't it be true that the more efficient the transfer of heat between atmosphere and melting ice, the closer to zero the air temperature would be? Wouldn't the transfer efficiency in turn be dependent on a combination of wind velocity and humidity ( i.e. very different depending on where/whether water is evaporating from/condensing onto the ice surface). If there's sublimation/surface water evaporation going on might this not actually cool the ice whilst simultaneously raising the air temperature?

...Maybe this belongs in "stupid questions.. I don't know.



F.Tnioli

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 767
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 148
  • Likes Given: 36
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2324 on: June 17, 2016, 08:12:43 PM »
Sebastian is correct, i think.

Overall, what happens lately (June so far) makes one curious thing to probabilities: annual minimum record probabilities decrease, however maximum daily drop "ever" probabilities - increase. The longer this unusually slow extent loss goes on, the more potential there is in the system to see some insane drops further on.

1M km2 daily drop, anyone? Yeah, i exagerrate, but you catch my drift, i'm sure. %)
To everyone: before posting in a melting season topic, please be sure to know contents of this moderator's post: https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,3017.msg261893.html#msg261893 . Thanks!

magnamentis

  • Guest
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2325 on: June 17, 2016, 08:20:36 PM »
Sebastian is correct, i think.

Overall, what happens lately (June so far) makes one curious thing to probabilities: annual minimum record probabilities decrease, however maximum daily drop "ever" probabilities - increase. The longer this unusually slow extent loss goes on, the more potential there is in the system to see some insane drops further on.

1M km2 daily drop, anyone? Yeah, i exagerrate, but you catch my drift, i'm sure. %)

that's exactly what i'm expecting, let's see, interesting as ever :-)

of course without the exaggeration, 150-200k drops is what we're head at more sooner than later, not necessarily this year but could well be.

magnamentis

  • Guest
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2326 on: June 17, 2016, 08:23:58 PM »
not that small of a lead anymore, at least one can't see the opposite beach LOL ( side of course )  :) :D ;D



Gray-Wolf

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 890
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 122
  • Likes Given: 318
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2327 on: June 17, 2016, 08:39:36 PM »
A series of large ( 100km +) drops would also be the thing to confirm my current worries that things did not stand still on the ablation front as daily extent falls slowed.
When you increasingly, year on year, see expanses of similar thickness ice at the end of refreeze then the fear has to be the spectre of big drops toward the end of the season as those final 30cm of ice just let go and ever larger expanses of ice just 'blink out'?

Throw in extra warmed water due to open waters early in the season and this becomes ever more possible?

Just because we have not seen such behaviour, on such a grand scale, does not mean it is a 'fantasy' and maybe we should open to the early signs that the pack will see a large , late season 'blink out' event, even before the main melt has properly set in?

For a number of years after the first full melt out I imagine that we will face such a 'will it ,wont it?' debate each year  and so the way we have learned to look at melt ponds in the early melt season as an indicator of that season we should be looking for the 'Tells' that hint at large , late doors, melt out?

KOYAANISQATSI

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

pauldry600

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 231
    • View Profile
    • weathergossip
  • Liked: 24
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2328 on: June 17, 2016, 08:56:34 PM »
Think Winters will have less and less Ice as a matter of opinion and warmer sst. Then Summer will have slower declines but be in the top 5 worst EVERY year

jdallen

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3234
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 499
  • Likes Given: 204
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2329 on: June 17, 2016, 09:02:50 PM »
A series of large ( 100km +) drops would also be the thing to confirm my current worries that things did not stand still on the ablation front as daily extent falls slowed.

Well, here's a candidate.

The Kara is well on its way to fully disintegrating, and you can see additional disintegrating ice in the gap at the NE tip of the Barents.
This space for Rent.

Steven

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 627
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 189
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2330 on: June 17, 2016, 09:23:02 PM »
Interesting. The 925mb temps are noticeably lower than 2012, but the same isn't true at 2 meters, where June looks pretty warm:

http://cires1.colorado.edu/~aslater/ARCTIC_TAIR/index_80_t2m.html

This week was pretty warm north of 80°N.  But if you look at the entire Arctic for the first half of June, then 2012 was clearly warmer than 2016.  This is true both at 2 meters and at 925mb.

The images below show the NCEP/NCAR surface air temperature anomaly for the first half of June 2016 and 2012 respectively.  (I assume this is for at 2 meters above the surface).

2016:


2012:
« Last Edit: June 17, 2016, 09:57:55 PM by Steven »

Tensor

  • New ice
  • Posts: 73
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2331 on: June 17, 2016, 10:00:36 PM »
  ?   Eureka is claiming just 13.9'C atm as today's highest temperature ..

I think there may be a transcription error.  They are currently showing 14C(which I suppose could be mistaken for 19).  Even so, 14C sets a new record high for the date.

A toasty 14.2 this evening, and still 14C at 11pm at night. Given the location and date, those temperatures are phenomenal.

Yesterday(16 Jun), we mentioned that Eureka set a new high temp with 14C (previous was 12C). Today(17 June) it has already hit 16C, breaking the previous record of 14C for the date.
Paid Insane Murdoch Drone

werther

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 747
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 31
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2332 on: June 17, 2016, 10:29:30 PM »
Yes, Eureka has some impressive weather. But it is quite land-locked in the centre of Ellesmere with all of Axel Heiberg Island to the West. It warms easily for its latitude. Don't give it too much importance.

RoxTheGeologist

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 516
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 150
  • Likes Given: 126
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2333 on: June 17, 2016, 10:46:32 PM »
Yes, Eureka has some impressive weather. But it is quite land-locked in the centre of Ellesmere with all of Axel Heiberg Island to the West. It warms easily for its latitude. Don't give it too much importance.

But the ice there is looking very blue and shonky. The ice all along the edge CAB of the CAA seems to be pretty blue and broken up (from my limited experience). It's in worse shape than the last two years at the very least.

http://go.nasa.gov/1XunaxU

jplotinus

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 127
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 14
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2334 on: June 17, 2016, 11:10:54 PM »
Yes, Eureka has some impressive weather. But it is quite land-locked in the centre of Ellesmere with all of Axel Heiberg Island to the West. It warms easily for its latitude. Don't give it too much importance.

Werther

Based on your observation, I wonder if Alert, at the northern tip of Ellesmere, might be a better site for temperature observation on Ellesmere Island, as it relates to sea ice? Alert is at the coast adjacent to fast ice. While temperatures at Alert have been above 0° for the last several days, Alert has not had any 10°+ temperature readings as yet, to my knowledge.

Tensor

  • New ice
  • Posts: 73
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2335 on: June 17, 2016, 11:28:05 PM »
Yes, Eureka has some impressive weather. But it is quite land-locked in the centre of Ellesmere with all of Axel Heiberg Island to the West. It warms easily for its latitude. Don't give it too much importance.

Ahhhhhh, OK, I was making a point about it setting records and I was under the impression that the warmth was over more than just Eureka and  Thanks for clearing that up for me. 
Paid Insane Murdoch Drone

oren

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6209
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2257
  • Likes Given: 1894
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2336 on: June 17, 2016, 11:29:35 PM »
Yes, Eureka has some impressive weather. But it is quite land-locked in the centre of Ellesmere with all of Axel Heiberg Island to the West. It warms easily for its latitude. Don't give it too much importance.

Werther

Based on your observation, I wonder if Alert, at the northern tip of Ellesmere, might be a better site for temperature observation on Ellesmere Island, as it relates to sea ice? Alert is at the coast adjacent to fast ice. While temperatures at Alert have been above 0° for the last several days, Alert has not had any 10°+ temperature readings as yet, to my knowledge.

At least according to this site, June 12th saw a daily high of 10.50C in Alert.
In addition, low temps have flipped to above zero on June 8th, and stayed there since. Quite impressive. Means plenty of insolation is getting through above 800, even if the center of the Arctic is cloudy.

http://climate.weather.gc.ca/climate_data/daily_data_e.html?StationID=42463


Tigertown

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1676
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2337 on: June 17, 2016, 11:59:17 PM »
The last image that I have seen of the clouds over the Arctic, they were not everywhere at one time. I am sure they are hindering but not completely stopping insolation. And so many of these regions lost snow cover early this year.Plus the leaky jet stream keeps letting cold air escape and hot air to get in.
"....and the appointed time came for God to bring to ruin those ruining the earth." Revelation 11:18.

Gray-Wolf

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 890
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 122
  • Likes Given: 318
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2338 on: June 18, 2016, 12:23:54 AM »
And let's not forget the new paper looking at long wave radiation and finding that 'opaque' skies are better than 'clear skies' for imparting energy to the snow/ice below?
KOYAANISQATSI

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

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 7751
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1128
  • Likes Given: 512
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2339 on: June 18, 2016, 12:29:03 AM »
And let's not forget the new paper looking at long wave radiation and finding that 'opaque' skies are better than 'clear skies' for imparting energy to the snow/ice below?

Yes, but only as it relates to melt onset. Warm, moist air is better at getting the ice/snow surface to melt for the first time, if temperatures are cold, because short-wave radiation bounces off the white surface, whereas long-wave radiation reflected back off clouds etc does get absorbed.

After melt onset, short-wave radiation is more effective at building up melting momentum. That is, if I've interpreted the paper correctly.

I wanted to use it for the latest blog post, but didn't where to fit it in, as melt onset is even more difficult to pinpoint and then compare to previous years, and the authors haven't looked at this year yet (too early). They will at some point, and I'll hope to share the info, even though we're already well into the melting season by then.
Il faut comparer, comparer, comparer, et cultiver notre jardin

Michael Hauber

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 900
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 78
  • Likes Given: 14
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2340 on: June 18, 2016, 01:15:25 AM »
I try to judge melt onset based on MODIS 3-6-7 channel.  Not sure how close it is to true melt onset when this channel turns from orange to red, but at least its somewhat consistent from year to year.  Except for clouds everywhere.  I put June 10 as roughly the date that the entire Arctic was covered by surface melt in 2012.  This year I don't think we've achieved this state yet, but it gets tricky to judge whats going on when there is a lot of clouds and most of what is not covered by clouds shows surface melt.  In 2013 and 14 the pattern of cloud and areas visible with no surface melt gave me confidence that large areas were not melting around this time of year.  However this year things are trickier.  There is a large patch of visible melting between Greenland and the pole, which is one of the harder areas to get melt on.  There are small areas visible of no melt in Beufort and Laptev, and quite a lot of cloud which makes it very hard to judge what is happening in between.  Current models suggest cooler air between Beaufort and Laptev in a narrowish strip and my guestimate is that we may be at roughly 75% of the ice showing red if we could see through the clouds.  Not nearly as bad as 2012, but much worse than 13 and 14.
Climate change:  Prepare for the worst, hope for the best, expect the middle.

VeliAlbertKallio

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 201
  • Eheu fugaces labuntur anni
    • View Profile
    • Sea Research Society (SRS)
  • Liked: 80
  • Likes Given: 111
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2341 on: June 18, 2016, 01:16:48 AM »
It appears 18th June forecast by US Navy that a very rapid thinning of sea ice is about to occur at the end of this latest forecast causing ice losses from the Laptev Sea to the proximity of the North Pole which advances melting considerably on Russian side: http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticictn_nowcast_anim30d.gif
« Last Edit: June 18, 2016, 01:26:59 AM by VeliAlbertKallio »
"Setting off atomic bombs is considered socially pungent as the years are made of fleeting ice that are painted by the piling up of the rays of the sun."

Quantum

  • New ice
  • Posts: 99
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2342 on: June 18, 2016, 01:19:01 AM »
ECMWF is going for a completely cyclonic next 10 days; some of the storms look potentially problematic for the ice as pressure dips below 992mb occasionally. Generally speaking though I would expect this to be about the best weather we could wish for near the summer solstice.

A-Team

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2664
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 557
  • Likes Given: 30
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2343 on: June 18, 2016, 02:10:31 AM »
Quote
let's not forget the new paper looking at long wave radiation and finding that 'opaque' skies are better than 'clear skies' for imparting energy to the snow/ice below?

only as it relates to melt onset. Warm, moist air is better at getting the ice/snow surface to melt for the first time .. After melt onset, short-wave radiation is more effective at building up melting momentum if I've interpreted the paper correctly.
Not if that new paper is the one below. This research only addresses melt onset. There is a single very familiar sentence midway on sunlight being ineffectual until melt (or whatever) has decreased albedo, not any comparison of effectiveness. Clouds are complex and counterintuitive.

It reminds me of the record July 2012 melt-out of Greenland -- that too is attributed to cloud cover (of just the right kind), not sunny skies. And this year's shocking melt came far too early for such attribution. http://tinyurl.com/zp6xhha

Melt onset over Arctic sea ice controlled by atmospheric moisture transport
J Mortin ... JC. Stroeve et al
http://tinyurl.com/j2q2hs5 free full

The timing of melt onset affects the surface energy uptake throughout the melt season. Yet the processes triggering melt and causing its large interannual variability are not well understood. Here, we show that melt onset over Arctic sea ice is initiated by positive anomalies of water vapor, clouds, and air temperatures that increase the downwelling longwave radiation (LWD) to the surface. The earlier melt onset occurs, the stronger are these anomalies. Downwelling shortwave radiation (SWD) is smaller than usual at melt onset, indicating that melt is not triggered by SWD.

When melt occurs early, an anomalously opaque atmosphere with positive LWD anomalies preconditions the surface for weeks preceding melt. In contrast, when melt begins late, clearer than usual conditions are evident prior to melt. Hence, atmospheric processes are imperative for melt onset. It is also found that spring LWD increased during recent decades, consistent with trends towards an earlier melt onset.

The seasonal transition from winter to summer plays an important role for the Arctic climate. The timing of sea ice melt onset affects the energy absorbed by the surface throughout the summer melt season, because after melt begins, the albedo continues to decrease until either the sea ice is completely melted and disappears or freeze-up has begun.

Over multi year ice, for any day melt begins earlier, additional energy sufficient to melt 3 cm of sea ice during the melt season is absorbed [Perovich et al., 2007]. Since melt onset has been occurring successively earlier over the last few decades, the energy uptake over the Arctic Ocean in summer has increased by an amount large enough to melt about 1 m of ice over a recent 5-year period [Stroeve 2014 http://tinyurl.com/h5zurgz].

This additional energy warms the ocean during summer, leading to a substantially later fall freeze-up and a warmer lower atmosphere in the fall.Hereby the atmospheric circulation, both within and outside of the Arctic region, may be altered
...
At a specific site and a certain year, the melt onset was found to be triggered by moist, warm air masses associated with synoptic-scale weather systems that augmented the atmospheric energy fluxes to the surface... Arctic melt onset is weakly linked to two atmospheric circulation indicators, the Arctic oscillation and the 500-hPa height.

The increased cloudiness leads to a reduction of downwelling shortwave radiation at the surface (SWD). These findings imply that the enhanced greenhouse effect associated with more [imported, non-local] moisture and clouds in the atmosphere is crucial for the timing of the melt onset over sea ice. Further, SWD in itself seems of minor importance for triggering melt.

After melt is initiated, however, the importance of the SWD increases as the albedo of the sea-ice surface decreases and more solar radiation is absorbed by the surface.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2016, 02:17:07 AM by A-Team »

icy voyeur

  • New ice
  • Posts: 63
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2344 on: June 18, 2016, 02:29:59 AM »
Children, please. I repeat some from earlier with a different perspective.

Don't get too distracted by kinetics versus thermodynamics. Kinetics of ice melt rules daily variation. Thermodynamics rules longer term trends. Metrics like extent and delta extent per day are sensitive to kinetics of ice melt, as well as dispersion. But the ultimate driver is thermodynamic. How much heat enters the arctic. Direct heat in is a question of albedo, clouds hurt, reflective ice hurts, clear skies maximize, blue waters maximize. It adds up.

Imported heat, mostly from ocean currents, also from winds (wet air holds more heat), that's a mix of weather and adjuncts of weather. We are on a highway to hell but there are unknown curves in the road ahead.

People really ought to rejoice in weather that delays melt. Lucky weather does provide feedback to slow the inevitable disaster and slower is better. Still, some seem angry that this year might not set records. Boggle!

JayW

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 603
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 220
  • Likes Given: 264
"To defy the laws of tradition, is a crusade only of the brave" - Les Claypool

werther

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 747
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 31
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2346 on: June 18, 2016, 11:31:39 AM »
Yes, Jay,
Hudson Bay must be one of the places contributing to the latest env. 60K daily fall in extent. No MODIS tiles. I should try Worldview, but leave that to others.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2016, 05:00:14 PM by werther »

Lord M Vader

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1330
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 46
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2347 on: June 18, 2016, 11:38:55 AM »
Werther, I think you can add Kara Sea to Hudson Bay.

In any case, a potentially BIG MAC seems to develop in the next few days bottoming out at 980-985 hpa and fairly large size too. Will be interesting to see its impact on the ice.

JayW

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 603
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 220
  • Likes Given: 264
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2348 on: June 18, 2016, 11:45:31 AM »
I always see the NWP forecasts, so I thought I'd add a different approach.  National Weather Service's Climate Prediction Center generates 6-10 day and 8-15 day forecasts based on constructed analogs, taking the 10 days that most closely match current conditions within 35 days of the date.

First attachment is the 8-10 day 500mb mean anomaly for the ECMWF, GFS, and CMC
http://mp1.met.psu.edu/~fxg1/CMCNA_0z/hgtcomp.html


Second attachment is the 500mb 6-10 day CPC constructed analog forecast (black lives) and anomalies (red, blue, and purple)
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/predictions/610day/analog.php

Edit, attachments 3 and 4 are gifs that require a "click"

Third attachment days 6-10 sea level pressure using the analogs.

Forth attachment is 850'mb temp anomaly.

The constructed analog attach looks very aggressive with the ridging on the Russian/Pacific side.

Time will tell which is closer to reality.  :)
« Last Edit: June 18, 2016, 11:52:39 AM by JayW »
"To defy the laws of tradition, is a crusade only of the brave" - Les Claypool

Adam Ash

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 309
    • View Profile
    • The 100 metre line
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: The 2016 melting season
« Reply #2349 on: June 18, 2016, 01:26:12 PM »
For an equivalent volume of ice, would not said ice contained in huge solid floes occupy a much lower extent than the same volume comprised of smaller bits?

Thus,  if that is the case, is not the recent 'stall' in extent loss possibly indicative of, in fact, a combination of on-going melt plus fragmentation of the bigger floes?  Any increase in extent then being indicative of increased smallification of floes, rather than of re-freezing.

Said effects, of course, beiing most readily discerned at ... The Edge.