When will be break PIOMAS 2012 September record of 3,787 km3?

[Juan C. García]

PIOMAS Volume (Monthly average, 1,000 km³)
(Monthly minimums highlighted in red)

Year      Jan       Feb       Mar      Apr      May       Jun        Jul      Aug      Sep       Oct      Nov      Dec   
1979   27.70   30.17   32.05   32.95   32.30   29.79   23.66   18.41   16.91   17.85   20.12   23.20   
1980   26.53   29.15   31.13   32.24   31.81   29.15   22.87   17.79   16.32   17.33   19.42   22.45   
1981   25.32   27.77   29.82   30.74   30.03   26.82   20.17   14.64   12.81   13.97   16.15   19.12   
1982   22.63   25.49   27.65   28.97   28.30   25.62   19.67   14.83   13.51   14.91   17.77   21.07   
1983   24.46   27.28   29.39   30.39   30.17   27.76   21.85   16.74   15.20   16.43   18.95   21.96   
1984   24.73   27.21   29.15   30.33   29.82   27.09   20.94   16.15   14.64   15.66   18.10   21.29   
1985   24.64   27.26   29.45   30.86   30.52   27.49   20.77   16.01   14.58   15.84   18.29   21.29   
1986   24.68   27.52   29.77   30.93   30.46   27.86   21.95   17.29   16.08   17.38   19.86   22.74   
1987   26.03   28.84   30.66   31.79   31.50   28.81   22.27   16.71   15.35   16.70   19.26   22.30   
1988   25.47   28.13   30.28   31.20   30.21   27.23   21.10   16.33   14.99   16.25   18.93   22.13   
1989   25.36   27.84   29.42   30.11   29.62   27.12   21.08   16.20   14.77   15.94   18.65   21.80   
1990   24.97   27.63   29.39   29.91   28.91   25.49   19.52   14.89   13.82   15.22   18.26   21.52   
1991   24.69   27.48   29.67   30.74   30.01   26.79   20.01   15.01   13.59   15.02   17.69   20.89   
1992   24.18   26.91   28.68   29.64   29.26   26.85   20.90   15.92   15.08   16.58   19.16   22.33   
1993   25.30   27.72   29.46   30.43   29.58   25.81   18.51   13.48   12.44   13.96   16.98   20.40   
1994   23.85   26.67   28.71   29.74   29.31   26.55   20.03   14.90   13.86   15.20   17.94   21.21   
1995   24.20   26.43   27.95   28.45   27.31   23.81   17.19   12.44   11.24   12.13   14.84   18.18   
1996   21.65   24.47   26.39   27.45   27.26   24.87   19.28   14.90   13.95   15.39   17.40   20.15   
1997   23.50   26.32   28.32   29.37   28.74   25.72   19.24   14.38   13.23   14.20   16.62   19.92   
1998   23.47   26.36   28.30   29.41   28.82   25.36   18.58   13.29   11.63   12.81   15.64   18.95   
1999   22.43   25.32   27.30   28.45   27.92   24.88   18.52   13.08   11.05   12.43   15.38   18.39   
2000   21.71   24.30   26.17   27.15   26.69   23.88   17.43   12.42   11.08   12.31   14.90   17.95   
2001   21.26   24.13   26.41   27.63   26.87   23.83   17.90   13.40   12.28   13.32   15.76   18.61   
2002   21.84   24.79   26.66   27.43   26.82   23.69   17.16   12.13   10.85   11.89   14.59   17.84   
2003   21.24   24.13   26.31   27.24   26.27   22.91   16.49   11.50   10.28   11.20   13.69   16.85   
2004   20.05   22.66   24.81   25.75   25.31   22.71   16.58   11.52   10.04   11.25   13.97   17.24   
2005   20.25   22.67   24.82   26.05   25.35   21.62   15.23   10.71     9.28   10.18   12.85   15.98   
2006   19.31   22.04   24.05   25.11   24.34   20.90   14.69   10.40     9.11     9.81   12.26   15.04   
2007   18.32   20.81   23.00   23.75   23.09   19.19   12.12     7.62     6.53     7.11   10.40   14.17   
2008   18.52   21.53   23.82   24.98   24.12   20.58   14.15     9.20     7.25     8.27   11.70   15.13   
2009   18.79   21.68   23.79   24.94   23.88   19.73   12.83     8.27     6.93     7.63   10.76   14.18   
2010   17.67   20.58   23.08   24.10   22.22   17.14   10.24     5.93     4.74     6.20     9.48   12.93   
2011   16.21   19.32   21.39   22.50   21.14   16.50     9.55     5.49     4.48     5.72     9.25   12.99   
2012   16.89   19.59   21.92   23.12   21.71   16.00     9.26     4.96     3.79     5.00     8.22   12.13   
2013   15.80   19.32   21.96   23.12   21.87   17.54   10.54     6.39     5.48     6.95   10.08   13.79   
2014   17.41   19.85   21.80   22.94   21.91   17.68   11.95     8.15     6.97     8.16   11.48   15.07   
2015   18.45   21.46   23.21   24.23   23.03   18.56   11.65     7.09     5.85     7.01   10.30   14.00   
2016   17.19   19.59   21.52   22.46   21.03   16.49   10.26     5.94     4.53     5.51     7.83   11.21   
2017   14.64   17.37   19.60   20.65

[Juan C. García]

To break 2012 September record, 2017 will have to decrease 16,866 km³ -or more- from April to September.

The following graph shows the years that have a greater or lesser decrease than 16,866 km³ from April to September. It was usual, before 2007, to have not such a decrease. But from 2007 to 2016, all years -except 2014- have a decrease greater than 16,866 km³. From my point of view, we have been seen a new Arctic, specially from 2007 to date.

Therefore, I think that we will break the record this year.

[Graph in km³]

[oren]

In May, 2017 will still be first. The big test will come in June. But really this year should set a new record given the current situation.

[RikW]

Seeing the cracks on worldview and the speed at which they develop in the multi-year/thick ice region, the fact that the Nares strait arch is showing cracks and the general state of the ice/ the low number of freezing days, I'd vote 2017.

If it's not 2017 then there are unexpected feedback circles or the models of the current situation are wrong

[Neven]

Like oren says, based on the information we have now, it should probably happen this year.

[DavidR]

Perhaps we should split 2017 into July, August and Sept to give a bit  of extra choice.

[Paddy]

Given that just about everyone (including myself) has plumped for 2017, what probability are those of you who voted this way ascribing it?

- Less than 50% but greater than any other bracket
- 50 to 70%
- 70 to 90%
- Greater than 90%
- Don't know, just guessing

Based on Oren's figures, 9 out of 10 or 90% of the past ten years would give us a total volume less than 2012 at the end of the year, but personally I'd err on the cautious side of future prediction and say 50 to 70% certainty of a new record, because we'd probably still need to have at least fairly good late season  melt conditions to hit the central arctic basin to a similar extent.

EDIT: DavidR, I'd say September. August is possible but definitely not July. Just look at the graph - the current difference between April's record low volume and prior Aprils is dwarfed by the July to August drop:

[RikW]

August wouldn't be really surprising. If I see the PIOMAS graphs the difference between the end of august and the record lows is ~250 km3 while the current difference is ~2.000 km3.

For example, I think the september 2016 record was around the 6th

If the record is broken in july already there will be no ice left for sure in september

[johnm33]

August 9^th

[DoomInTheUK]

If Aug 9th is anywhere near right then it'll be carnage come the end of Sep.

One of the first things I learned about that Arctic....What ever the current position, give it a month and we'll know better.

[seaicesailor]

August 9th is a good choice :-)

[RikW]

EDIT: DavidR, I'd say September. August is possible but definitely not July. Just look at the graph - the current difference between April's record low volume and prior Aprils is dwarfed by the July to August drop:

Well, July would be an option.
Lowest ever in july was according to PIOMAS july 31th 2012 at 6.538 km3
Lowest ever was 3.673 at september 17th 2012

That's a 2.865 difference

At April 30th we were 2.411 lower then 2012. If we keep the exact difference the rest of this year we will reach a new record at august 4th this year.

So a new record in July wouldn't be that weird based on those numbers.

And of course this isn't a serious prediction/ forecast, but I wouldn't exclude the possibility either. Though I still expect to win a large lottery price first before this happening in 2017

[Csnavywx]

Spring (April) volume explains about 45% of the variance at minimum. So, while it's not a guarantee that we get a record low volume, the dice have been loaded in favor of that outcome. Obviously, the late May to late June pattern is coming up and that will account for another big chunk of the variance. We'll know soon enough -- probably by the end of this month (since ensembles can reach out about 10 days ahead on the large scale pattern).

[seaicesailor]

Spring (April) volume explains about 45% of the variance at minimum. So, while it's not a guarantee that we get a record low volume, the dice have been loaded in favor of that outcome. Obviously, the late May to late June pattern is coming up and that will account for another big chunk of the variance. We'll know soon enough -- probably by the end of this month (since ensembles can reach out about 10 days ahead on the large scale pattern).

Naive (really) question: shouldn't the CFS be apt for these 10-15 day forecasts of the general circulation? Since the CFS simulates not only the atmosphere but also the ocean evolution and its interaction with the atmosphere, including its own ice model.
While the ice model has shown no skill whatsoever on the long run over the years, the ocean SSTs and ice evolution within a few weeks could be beneficial for the simulations.
I say this since lately I have been posting here CFS plots by tropicaltidbits like every two weeks. Seems pretty reliable since March...
What do you think?

[Juan C. García]

Thank you for this great participation in this poll! Almost 50 votes in less than 15 hours!

Seems that we agree in what is happening and that is the reason why we are here. We are witnessing an event unprecedented, sadly, because it puts humanity on danger. We have to do something about it, but in the mean time, lets continue with the reason of this Forum, to study the Arctic and AGW in general.

[Jim Williams]

Please try to stay on topic. -- j.p.

<snip>

[TerryM]

I very seldom participate in polls, but this time it really looks like better than 50%. I don't imagine that anything other than Aug. or Sept. has a realistic chance.
Terry

[rboyd]

With the forecast for clear skies and above zero temperatures for major parts of the Arctic during the critical May/early June timeframe, has to be a better than even chance that we will break the record this year. More a question of how much by, rather than if.

[DavidR]

EDIT: DavidR, I'd say September. August is possible but definitely not July. Just look at the graph - the current difference between April's record low volume and prior Aprils is dwarfed by the July to August drop:

Paddy, as RikW points out it depends whether we are looking at the daily figure or monthly average. This is critical in July where the daily figures plummet  and the 'average' occurs mid month. Personally I see 2017 as so likely that I am not going to bother to vote unless the options are changed to include the individual months this year.   

[Juan C. García]

Paddy, as RikW points out it depends whether we are looking at the daily figure or monthly average. This is critical in July where the daily figures plummet  and the 'average' occurs mid month. Personally I see 2017 as so likely that I am not going to bother to vote unless the options are changed to include the individual months this year.

Done, as options at the end of the poll.
The poll is on Piomas monthly average, as published directly by Piomas (fill the second questionnaire to download the data, that is the same that I put at the beginning of the poll):

http://psc.apl.uw.edu/research/projects/arctic-sea-ice-volume-anomaly/data/

[Juan C. García]

Hi Neven and Dungeonmaster:

The option of removing the vote disappeared, after the change that I made to the poll.
I appreciate if you help me to included it again.

Thank you!

[miki]

August 3^rd 

[Sterks]

I think I'm going to earn a position of target of some criticism and unfriendliness, but I've got the impression that some of you people are selectively ignoring facts:
- It is true that the Pacific sector has a very bad color. Nevertheless, the Beaufort Sea (key in the destruction of ice) has only come to a modest start. More importantly, the Beaufort Sea has ended a lot colder than last spring. See how fractures are frozen as soon as they are opened and we are on May 11th. The refreezing came very late (December) with the loss of ocean heat that this entails. Not only that, the snow has generally been scarce in the area, so ice has nicely thickened reaching up to three meters (see Piomas, Cryosat).
- We are waiting for a heat wave that some members are announcing since April. Be not disappointed, if it does not come. I put the chances at 50% that heat will be maintained during the month of June, that's the key. Why? Because the deposited snow on the continents, not only in Asia but also in America, broke all sorts of records, perhaps caused by the extreme deviation of the Arctic Autumn and the Winter. Could this not cause a cooling effect in the summer weather? Seems a bouncing oscillating effect that is not nuts at all.
- The extent is in normal values ​​of the 21st century, far from the lowest data from other years. Do not forget one thing: the extent and the area are very important to give a boost to the melting season or to inhibit it, and the critical time now begins. The albedo potential maps just show that the anomalies in the Pacific (relatively unimportant) are canceled out by the anomalies in the Atlantic (relatively unimportant), with anomalies in the Arctic proper that are just irrelevant for the time being. The brief time of change must come.
- Volume also rebounds

It's still early to forecast (also on volume), I'll wait as much as possible to make a prediction for this poll, to have a clearer judgment. A very strong heatwave must come, when it comes, if it comes, or if it doesn't, I will put my vote or just comment about it if the voting is closed.

[Neven]

Hi Neven and Dungeonmaster:

The option of removing the vote disappeared, after the change that I made to the poll.
I appreciate if you help me to included it again.

Thank you!

I've edited the poll, so people can change their vote if they want.

[DavidR]

I think I'm going to earn a position of target of some criticism and unfriendliness, Not at  all we are friendly  bunch, some of your assumptions may  be challenged tho.

- It is true that the Pacific sector has a very bad color. Nevertheless, the Beaufort Sea (key in the destruction of ice) has only come to a modest start. More importantly, the Beaufort Sea has ended a lot colder than last spring. YTD Temperatures for the Beaufort are second highest on record
- We are waiting for a heat wave that some members are announcing since April. Beaufort was hottest  since 2010 in April.

- The extent is in normal values ​​of the 21st century,  far from the lowest data from other years.   Extent is below average and reasonably  close to  second place. More importantly all of that  extra extent is in Baffin, Barents and Greenland which are seeing a lot of ice moving from further north. The Pacific figure is very low.
 
Do not forget one thing: the extent and the area are very important to give a boost to the melting season or to inhibit it. Last year we had lots of extra open water but it didn't translate to melting in June because of the thickness of the ice. This year the ice is much thinner and  should melt  out more quickly  one it  gets going.
- Volume also rebounds Volume may rebound but we are starting from a very low level in a very warm year.  Year to date 2017 is second warmest in the Arctic well ahead of every year  except last year. Only one year in the past decade saw a volume loss low enough to keep  2017 above the 2012 record

In my view there are good reasons to expect a volume and extent record low this year.

[Darvince]

The only thing I see that could stop a record low volume would be quantities of ice moving into the Barents Sea out of the way of the warm current flowing across the shelf edge there. I am expecting a record low volume come September like most, however I would disagree with the predictions on extent as being so certain because we have had several examples of years with a new record low volume but not a record low extent:

(From 13 years of volume record lows):
1981
1993
2003
2004
2006
2010
2011

[Juan C. García]

I think I'm going to earn a position of target of some criticism and unfriendliness, but I've got the impression that some of you people are selectively ignoring facts:

Not at all! Everyone, please feel free to make your honest opinion. In fact, I had the same opinion before:

The good news is that, according to Wipneus data, on April the area has not been decreasing fast. 2017 has 58 days being the lowest on area and 106 days among the 3 lowest, but on the last day that I evaluate (day 115, corresponding to April 25th on 2017) 2017 was on the 6th lowest. A little hope, but as of today, we haven't have a Beaufort Gyre like the one we had on April 2016.

It is just that I still believe that it is more important the weakness of the ice and the low volume that we have, than the extent or area that we can have on these days. One thing, that we will not know until August, is what is going to happen if there is a cyclone breaking the ice, like it happened on 2012 or with less damage, on 2016.

But the idea is to give the perception that we have on May, so I invite everyone to vote and express your opinion.

I've edited the poll, so people can change their vote if they want.

Thanks, Neven!

[seaicesailor]

I think I'm going to earn a position of target of some criticism and unfriendliness, but I've got the impression that some of you people are selectively ignoring facts:
- It is true that the Pacific sector has a very bad color. Nevertheless, the Beaufort Sea (key in the destruction of ice) has only come to a modest start. More importantly, the Beaufort Sea has ended a lot colder than last spring. See how fractures are frozen as soon as they are opened and we are on May 11th. The refreezing came very late (December) with the loss of ocean heat that this entails. Not only that, the snow has generally been scarce in the area, so ice has nicely thickened reaching up to three meters (see Piomas, Cryosat).
- We are waiting for a heat wave that some members are announcing since April. Be not disappointed, if it does not come. I put the chances at 50% that heat will be maintained during the month of June, that's the key. Why? Because the deposited snow on the continents, not only in Asia but also in America, broke all sorts of records, perhaps caused by the extreme deviation of the Arctic Autumn and the Winter. Could this not cause a cooling effect in the summer weather? Seems a bouncing oscillating effect that is not nuts at all.
- The extent is in normal values ​​of the 21st century, far from the lowest data from other years. Do not forget one thing: the extent and the area are very important to give a boost to the melting season or to inhibit it, and the critical time now begins. The albedo potential maps just show that the anomalies in the Pacific (relatively unimportant) are canceled out by the anomalies in the Atlantic (relatively unimportant), with anomalies in the Arctic proper that are just irrelevant for the time being. The brief time of change must come.
- Volume also rebounds

It's still early to forecast (also on volume), I'll wait as much as possible to make a prediction for this poll, to have a clearer judgment. A very strong heatwave must come, when it comes, if it comes, or if it doesn't, I will put my vote or just comment about it if the voting is closed.

I think we all agree on the importance of extent (or area) on early melting etc. But (allow some criticism),
- Understood about Beaufort sea (kind of shaken though), but what about that void over the Chukchi sea??
- Anomalies of albedo relatively unimportant over the Pacific?
 - Sun warms water near Bering strait
 - 100% chances the water enters the Arctic during spring and summer, it tends to happen
 - Warm water melts ice more than cold water

Agree with much of the rest, although land snow could be a source of heat in June when discharging after melting, as has been pointed before esp if warm weather.

I keep my vote of August momentarily :-)

[johnm33]

Switched vote to August, this year looks like 2012 in some respects, so guessed from eyeballing graph in comment 6.
added, practically twins if you ignore the pacific. http://nsidc.org/data/bist/bist.pl?annot=1&legend=1&scale=100&tab_cols=2&tab_rows=2&config=seaice_index&submit=Refresh&mo0=04&hemis0=N&img0=extn&mo1=04&hemis1=N&img1=conc&year0=2017&year1=2012

[Juan C. García]

For those who don't believe that the September 2012 record could be break on 2017:

Time for an update concerning sea ice area calculated from NSIDC sea ice concentration compared with extent (same as calculated by NSIDC).

While extent is 5th lowest (~690k higher than 2016), area has dropped to #10, more than 1 Million higher than 2016.

Here are the rankings for 11th May:

extent NH
datum: -05-11
2005-05-11 13.119149
2003-05-11 13.056350
2011-05-11 12.968637
2007-05-11 12.940884
2014-05-11 12.876776
2017-05-11 12.830311
2015-05-11 12.757955
2004-05-11 12.709222
2006-05-11 12.709040
2016-05-11 12.143364

area NH
2017-05-11 11.467165
2007-05-11 11.449676
2003-05-11 11.447578
2004-05-11 11.381959
2014-05-11 11.324955
2010-05-11 11.241607
2011-05-11 11.145334
2015-05-11 11.144258
2006-05-11 11.007650
2016-05-11 10.454304

I am keeping my vote on 2017. I just moved from "2017 (in general)" to "2017 by month: September".

P.D. Does anyone see 2012 on the 10 lowest that Wipneus is mentioning?   

[Sterks]

I think I'm going to earn a position of target of some criticism and unfriendliness, but I've got the impression that some of you people are selectively ignoring facts:
- It is true that the Pacific sector has a very bad color. Nevertheless, the Beaufort Sea (key in the destruction of ice) has only come to a modest start. More importantly, the Beaufort Sea has ended a lot colder than last spring. See how fractures are frozen as soon as they are opened and we are on May 11th. The refreezing came very late (December) with the loss of ocean heat that this entails. Not only that, the snow has generally been scarce in the area, so ice has nicely thickened reaching up to three meters (see Piomas, Cryosat).
- We are waiting for a heat wave that some members are announcing since April. Be not disappointed, if it does not come. I put the chances at 50% that heat will be maintained during the month of June, that's the key. Why? Because the deposited snow on the continents, not only in Asia but also in America, broke all sorts of records, perhaps caused by the extreme deviation of the Arctic Autumn and the Winter. Could this not cause a cooling effect in the summer weather? Seems a bouncing oscillating effect that is not nuts at all.
- The extent is in normal values ​​of the 21st century, far from the lowest data from other years. Do not forget one thing: the extent and the area are very important to give a boost to the melting season or to inhibit it, and the critical time now begins. The albedo potential maps just show that the anomalies in the Pacific (relatively unimportant) are canceled out by the anomalies in the Atlantic (relatively unimportant), with anomalies in the Arctic proper that are just irrelevant for the time being. The brief time of change must come.
- Volume also rebounds

It's still early to forecast (also on volume), I'll wait as much as possible to make a prediction for this poll, to have a clearer judgment. A very strong heatwave must come, when it comes, if it comes, or if it doesn't, I will put my vote or just comment about it if the voting is closed.

I wanted to quote the previous comment to add the context of what has happened since then with snow cover. I add a gif with May snow cover anomaly so far, from the Rutgers University Snow Lab
It is undeniable this year spring is late in many locations of the Northern Hemisphere, just as much early it was in preceding years. The wave of heat is coming north but with a delay caused by the buffer of heavy snow fallen in the winter.
This has a cooling effect, and as a consequence this will substract some of the heat reaching the Arctic via continental air acvections in the coming weeks.
However this is only a factor. Still not made up my mind. And it is true the heat at least is advancing much faster from the American side, this is truly dangerous.

[Richard Rathbone]

Preliminary PIOMAS data shows a pretty weak melt in May so far (weakest in ten years by my estimatation from Wipneus' graphs).

While I still think there's a good chance of a record this year, I also think there's a good chance that 2012 overtakes 2017 mid June and never loses its lead again and that's enough for me to switch to 2018+2019.

[magnamentis]

Preliminary PIOMAS data shows a pretty weak melt in May so far (weakest in ten years by my estimatation from Wipneus' graphs).

While I still think there's a good chance of a record this year, I also think there's a good chance that 2012 overtakes 2017 mid June and never loses its lead again and that's enough for me to switch to 2018+2019.

once again i want to point out the melt rate will fall the less ice there is to melt. to avoid a lengthy post i use the same extreme example again, once there is no ice left the melt rate will be zero logically and since volume has been on earlier summer levels in april it is simply not possible that the same melt rate can happen, else we would reach zero in juli instead of miinimum during fall.
unfortunately i'm not good in explaining things short, it would fill pages time would i try, so i hope someone gets my point and perhaps puts it into better wording, something that thankfully happened in the past.

observers have to adapt their thinking patterns and expectations to new starting situations.
it's like if a ski race's start point is lowered a few hundred meters, that someone would call the race slow because the speed of the drivers is close the zero on the same spot while it was over 100km/h before when the start was higher up.

LOL

[DavidR]

once again i want to point out the melt rate will fall the less ice there is to melt. to avoid a lengthy post i use the same extreme example again, once there is no ice left the melt rate will be zero logically and since volume has been on earlier summer levels in april it is simply not possible that the same melt rate can happen,

The concerning metric to watch is not how much melts each year but how much refreezes.  Over the past 37 years the amount of refreeze has been about 280 km^3 less than the amount of melt in the previous melting season. In recent years that has increased to over 400 km^3.  If that continues for the next 10 years we will be essentially ice free in September. Following that trend line for the next  50 years would see complete loss of the Arctic sea ice in Winter.  As the trend is increasing it could happen even quicker. 

If we follow the current polynomial trend line we will have five months ice free by 2030.

[magnamentis]

once again i want to point out the melt rate will fall the less ice there is to melt. to avoid a lengthy post i use the same extreme example again, once there is no ice left the melt rate will be zero logically and since volume has been on earlier summer levels in april it is simply not possible that the same melt rate can happen,

The concerning metric to watch is not how much melts each year but how much refreezes.  Over the past 37 years the amount of refreeze has been about 280 km^3 less than the amount of melt in the previous melting season. In recent years that has increased to over 400 km^3.  If that continues for the next 10 years we will be essentially ice free in September. Following that trend line for the next  50 years would see complete loss of the Arctic sea ice in Winter.  As the trend is increasing it could happen even quicker. 

If we follow the current polynomial trend line we will have five months ice free by 2030.

since i see things similarly i won't through in too many buts but i do NOT believe in more than 2 months ice-free due to certain seasonal parameters while "ice-free" is still not definitely defined. form many, ice-free seems to be anything below 1million km2 while for me, ice-free is zero significant ice, means, not much more than a few foes floating around randomly.

beside that i second that what you see coming.

[Richard Rathbone]

Preliminary PIOMAS data shows a pretty weak melt in May so far (weakest in ten years by my estimatation from Wipneus' graphs).

While I still think there's a good chance of a record this year, I also think there's a good chance that 2012 overtakes 2017 mid June and never loses its lead again and that's enough for me to switch to 2018+2019.

once again i want to point out the melt rate will fall the less ice there is to melt. to avoid a lengthy post i use the same extreme example again, once there is no ice left the melt rate will be zero logically and since volume has been on earlier summer levels in april it is simply not possible that the same melt rate can happen, else we would reach zero in juli instead of miinimum during fall.
unfortunately i'm not good in explaining things short, it would fill pages time would i try, so i hope someone gets my point and perhaps puts it into better wording, something that thankfully happened in the past.

observers have to adapt their thinking patterns and expectations to new starting situations.
it's like if a ski race's start point is lowered a few hundred meters, that someone would call the race slow because the speed of the drivers is close the zero on the same spot while it was over 100km/h before when the start was higher up.

LOL

Data shows that there has been no deceleration in melt rates yet, and that May and June have been accelerating (and the other 10 months more or less stable). Consequently May looking bad by historical standards is a rather worse indicator than for any other month save June.

[Juan C. García]

Thanks to all that have emit their vote and put a comment on this poll.
Two days left to vote! 

[Sterks]

I have voted 2017 in general. Although volume data coming show a slow May, it is clear that most of the thickest ice is piled up over the Barents sea and over that side of the Arctic basic which is quite vulnerable to Atlantic currents.
The heat wave in North Canada has erased and inverted the snow cover anomaly.
The same heat wave has activated melting over the Beaufort sea. I contended before that Beaufort sea was relatively cold early in May. That is no longer the case. This is really dangerous for the ice.
Warmth from the American continent and from the Pacific Ocean are what make strong melt.
PIOMAS volume is really low even counting the slow May evolution; even an average melt would set it on or near records.

[Juan C. García]

Last 9 hours to vote!
Thank you for making it! 

[Archimid]

I voted 2017, but the lack of an El Niño and the cooler N. Atlantic gives me pause. 

[Cid_Yama]

I believe June will be nonlinear and devastating.  I am the only July.  I might be proved wrong, but anything based on past linear progressions, I believe to be unwarranted.

Anyway, eventually the bottom will fall out, and like a lake where there is ice one day, and gone the next, it WILL happen.

   

[magnamentis]

I believe June will be nonlinear and devastating.  I am the only July.  I might be proved wrong, but anything based on past linear progressions, I believe to be unwarranted.

Anyway, eventually the bottom will fall out, and like a lake where there is ice one day, and gone the next, it WILL happen.

yes it will happen, but not this year for many reasons that have been pointed out on many occasions but generally i expect more sooner than later a scenario of the kind that you have just described. whenever it happens, a majority will be caught by surprise still :-)

[Cid_Yama]

Since we are heavily loaded for this year, I'm in good company.  Just a little doomier than most.

98-18 for this year.  That is 92% believing it will happen this year.  YOU are in the minority.

 

[Jim Williams]

Since we are heavily loaded for this year, I'm in good company.  Just a little doomier than most.

98-18 for this year.  That is 92% believing it will happen this year.  YOU are in the minority.

I always believe it will happen "this year," but I know that every year is a guess.  All I am sure of is that when it happens it will happen suddenly.

[Juan C. García]

Votes by year   Votes       %
Total 2017          98       84.5%
2018-2019           7         6.0%
2020-2023           5         4.3%
2022-2025           2         1.7%
After 2030            1         0.9%
Never                   3         2.6%
      
Total votes       116

Total votes that it will happen on the first three years of the Trump Government: 105 votes (90.5%).
________________________

Votes by month     Votes      %
July 2017                 1        2.6%
August 2017          16      42.1%
September 2017    21      55.3%
      
Total votes             38

Thank you for your votes and comments! 

[Juan C. García]

On May 2017, I made this poll, asking when would the PIOMAS 2012 September record could be break.

84% of the members on this Forum (including myself) thought that this could happen on 2017. But at the end, it didn't happened... 

How can we explain this? Just weather related?

[gerontocrat]

On May 2017, I made this poll, asking when would the PIOMAS 2012 September record could be break.

84% of the members on this Forum (including myself) thought that this could happen on 2017. But at the end, it didn't happened... 

How can we explain this? Just weather related?

The scientists on this forum can give you a much better answer, but this watcher suggests a really cool Arctic from July on plus Fram export sort of stopped.

But the great unknown is transportation, or lack of transportation, of ocean warmth that can overwhelm atmospheric signals.

The oceans rule , OK ?

[oren]

Another explanation was lots of snow one the ice, that helped protect it from the sun and prevented a new record.

[Pmt111500]

Already broken, Piomas just hasn't realised it yet  . But really I'm glad the cloud cover on summers has not been blown away by some weather event yet. My guess is june-july 2012 who dunnit back then. But on to more important matter. Who wants a polar bear to adopt, the right-wingers here in Finland say we can't afford to feed ours anymore?

[Juan C. García]

It is just that it is hard for me to believe that there is not a negative feedback, contributing to slow the ASI melting at August and September.

Specially on 2016, that was breaking all the extent records on the first six months and continued breaking them on October-December. Also, on 2017, that was breaking all the records on volume (that is, from November 2016 to July 2017).

You know what I think, because I already opened the topic Ice melting (Antarctica, Greenland, etc.) as a short term ASI negative feedback .

But let’s make another question:

On PIOMAS volume, we see a tendency to have bigger drops on June and July, as the years pass. But on August and September, the tendency is to have smaller drops.     

So, how can we explain that the volume drop is decreasing, on August and September? Any negative feedback that you know, that could explain this behavior?