Author Topic: January Poll 2019: JAXA Maximum (Read 11418 times)

Paddy · « **on:** January 05, 2019, 01:02:13 PM »

What do you think the max will be this year? Poll closes end of January, and you can change your vote any time before the poll closes.

Previous maximums in million square km:

2018: 13.89
2017: 13.88
2016: 13.96
2015: 13.94
2014: 14.45
2013: 14.52
2012: 14.71
2011: 14.13
2010: 14.69
2009: 14.66
2008: 14.77
2007: 14.21
2006: 14.13
2005: 14.4

Link to last year's poll here: https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2236.0.html

Tor Bejnar · « **Reply #1 on:** January 05, 2019, 02:54:01 PM »

Five votes (so far) and five different guesses. Only one covers (includes) previous 4 years' experience.

Stephan · « **Reply #2 on:** January 05, 2019, 04:14:35 PM »

I bet it's gonna be close to 14 M km², so I voted for the bin that is centered around 14 M

oren · « **Reply #3 on:** January 05, 2019, 04:19:14 PM »

I don't think there will be a new record. I think the Pacific side will be more normal than last year. Thought to vote 14-14.25 but then I saw the convenient bin of 13.875-14.125.

Paddy · « **Reply #4 on:** January 05, 2019, 05:55:30 PM »

Quote from: Tor Bejnar on January 05, 2019, 02:54:01 PM

Five votes (so far) and five different guesses. Only one covers (includes) previous 4 years' experience.

I think some people are voting above (myself included) because current JAXA is well above 3 out of the past 4 years (and still slightly above the 4th) https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2533.msg185776.html#msg185776.

Wherestheice · « **Reply #5 on:** January 05, 2019, 11:09:54 PM »

Things could change, but i expect somewhere around 13.90-14

Juan C. García · « **Reply #6 on:** January 06, 2019, 03:44:24 AM »

Quote from: Stephan on January 05, 2019, 04:14:35 PM

I bet it's gonna be close to 14 M km², so I voted for the bin that is centered around 14 M

+1

Neven · « **Reply #7 on:** January 06, 2019, 07:57:41 PM »

14 to 14.25, for now, but I'll probably re-vote after the SSW.

binntho · « **Reply #8 on:** January 07, 2019, 09:56:19 AM »

Not sure if constancy redeems sillyness, but having been silly enough to predict a new min-max this year, I'm forced to go for a bin that guarantees it (13.625-13.875) but dare not go any lower.

Tor Bejnar · « **Reply #9 on:** January 07, 2019, 04:44:05 PM »

The distribution of votes/guesses is more normal now. Edit: it's even more 'normal' after the latest vote added. Image replaced.

Pmt111500 · « **Reply #10 on:** January 07, 2019, 05:13:01 PM »

It'll be 13,98. (goes back to the bench by the wall, sits down and introverts himself despising categories)

echoughton · « **Reply #11 on:** January 07, 2019, 06:01:41 PM »

going with 14-25 bin. I feel upmystic.

Sterks · « **Reply #12 on:** January 08, 2019, 08:00:44 AM »

14-14.25. Time for a little "rebound".

Paddy · « **Reply #13 on:** January 15, 2019, 12:02:48 AM »

Going down half a bin to 14 - 14.25, and considering going down half a bin more, now that extent's down to 4th lowest on record.

Paddy · « **Reply #14 on:** January 16, 2019, 11:57:30 PM »

To the two respondents at the extreme ends of this poll (>14.5 and <13.25): would you rather I had included a wider range of values, and exactly how high / low are you predicting the max might be?

b_lumenkraft · « **Reply #15 on:** January 17, 2019, 06:32:08 AM »

Hey Paddy,

i'm the one who voted <13.25.

I'm thinking somewhere below the 2018 outcome of 13.89 so this option fits. The range of values is fine imho.

Klondike Kat · « **Reply #16 on:** January 18, 2019, 04:43:17 PM »

We seem to be stuck in the almost 14 M region the last few years, and I see no climate impetus to move out of it right now.

Paddy · « **Reply #17 on:** January 30, 2019, 08:15:00 AM »

Just over 24 hours until the poll closes. Last chance to submit or adjust your estimate.

Personally I've gone up half a bin, to 14.125 - 14.375, as the average remaining growth from the last 5 years would suggest (looking at the arctic sea ice data thread).

Thomas Barlow · « **Reply #18 on:** January 30, 2019, 06:06:16 PM »

Here is my prediction, based on late January sea-ice thickness.
Don't know what the numbers would be on something like this?

Juan C. García · « **Reply #19 on:** January 30, 2019, 06:18:52 PM »

Quote from: Juan C. García on January 06, 2019, 03:44:24 AM

Quote from: Stephan on January 05, 2019, 04:14:35 PM
I bet it's gonna be close to 14 M km², so I voted for the bin that is centered around 14 M

+1

I change my vote to 14 - 14.25.
(And today it is at 13.47, so it cannot be less than 13.25 million km²).

gerontocrat · « **Reply #20 on:** January 30, 2019, 07:49:18 PM »

I thought I would add some confusion to those still wondering where to place their chips.

The 1st thing is to be a chartist. I put a trend line (X²) on the JAXA graph. It says maximum exactly 14 million km2. Surely it must be right, R² coefficient 0.983 !!
Graph attached

The 2nd thing is the SSW of early Jan followed by the PSV causing such grief to parts of North America. Judah Cohen was talking about the effects dragging through to mid-March. Wunderground also said about the same thing - with a mid-March snap-back in temps for the USA. Siberia also looking really cold. In contrast, the Arctic Ocean, the Bering Sea, and the Atlantic front and even off shore off the far NE of Canada have +ve temp anomalies. i.s. WACC. If that lasts the peripheral seas might not be freezing so much as usual.
GFS average temp anomalies (10 day) attached.

The next posts add yet more confusion as I post the extent graphs (NSIDC data) for the seas still in play.

gerontocrat · « **Reply #21 on:** January 30, 2019, 07:58:48 PM »

On the Pacific side the seas in play are the Bering and the Okhotsk.
The Okhotsk always freezes up.
The Bering is a wild card.

On the Atlantic Front it is the Greenland and the Barents Seas.
The Barents is freezing ahead of schedule.
The Greenland Sea freeze is partly dependent on ice coming down the Fram Strait. Who knows?

gerontocrat · « **Reply #22 on:** January 30, 2019, 08:07:29 PM »

The Central Arctic Sea can cause a surprise. (Lat year the February SSW and remarkable warmth pushing north of Greenland)

The Baffin Bay and St Lawrence Sea remaining freeze will depend very much on whether the WACC phenomenon allows warmth to continue on the fringes of Eastern and NE Canada

gerontocrat · « **Reply #23 on:** January 30, 2019, 08:10:13 PM »

ps: I vote 14.000 km2

Brigantine · « **Reply #24 on:** January 31, 2019, 03:55:55 AM »

14 - 14.25. Overlapping with 2/3 of the responses.

Not expecting any surprises

uniquorn · « **Reply #25 on:** January 31, 2019, 05:08:03 PM »

I am (if it's possible to expect a surprise

) but extent will probably look as expected. 14.

binntho · « **Reply #26 on:** February 04, 2019, 10:42:58 AM »

Still holding out for a new minimax, doable but perhaps not very likely. Sticking with 13.625 to 13.875.

Wherestheice · « **Reply #27 on:** February 13, 2019, 08:50:12 AM »

If the Arctic wants to be a new record low maximum, it only has 125,000 Km2 left to grow. Will it continue to grow as it has the last few days and not beat the record or taper off?

Neven · « **Reply #28 on:** February 13, 2019, 09:59:42 AM »

Looking at the forecasts, it seems we'll have ice expansion in the Okhotsk and Atlantic front (Greenland+Barentsz), both from wind and low temps. No chance of a new record low maximum this year, IMO.

binntho · « **Reply #29 on:** February 13, 2019, 10:17:01 AM »

Quote from: Neven on February 13, 2019, 09:59:42 AM

Looking at the forecasts, it seems we'll have ice expansion in the Okhotsk and Atlantic front (Greenland+Barentsz), both from wind and low temps. No chance of a new record low maximum this year, IMO.

The changes of a new minimax are rapidly disappearing ...

Wherestheice · « **Reply #30 on:** February 14, 2019, 05:11:19 AM »

With the century gain today, indeed its almost impossible now for a new record low

Paddy · « **Reply #31 on:** February 21, 2019, 12:32:10 AM »

Quote from: Wherestheice on February 14, 2019, 05:11:19 AM

With the century gain today, indeed its almost impossible now for a new record low

And now a top 4 place is impossible. If there are no more gains, the modal guess from the forum will prove correct... but only time will tell.

Wherestheice · « **Reply #32 on:** February 25, 2019, 06:11:00 AM »

I’m calling max

Paddy · « **Reply #33 on:** February 25, 2019, 09:16:51 AM »

Quote from: Wherestheice on February 25, 2019, 06:11:00 AM

I’m calling max

You could well be right, but we'll have to wait a bit longer to know for sure. We've only dropped 120k from the max-so-far, and on average there'd still be over 200k of ice to gain at this date.

Neven · « **Reply #34 on:** February 25, 2019, 09:44:11 AM »

Quote from: Wherestheice on February 25, 2019, 06:11:00 AM

I’m calling max

Let us know if he says anything interesting.

Paddy · « **Reply #35 on:** February 27, 2019, 01:20:51 PM »

Currently, we're nearly 200k below the max so far of 14,194,560. The increase seen from 6 out of the last 10 years would push the max still higher, and the increase seen in 3 or 4 of those years would be sufficient to push it up by another half bin (looking at Gerontocrat's figures here; I've been a little imprecise by saying 3 or 4 because 2008-9 is borderline).

IMHO this could still go either way...

gerontocrat · « **Reply #36 on:** February 27, 2019, 01:34:36 PM »

Quote from: Neven on February 25, 2019, 09:44:11 AM

Quote from: Wherestheice on February 25, 2019, 06:11:00 AM
I’m calling max

Let us know if he says anything interesting.

Wherestheice has gone walkabout. So I rang Max. He didn't say anything interesting. After being asked the question with rising irritation several times, he said " I dunno".

Juan C. García · « **Reply #37 on:** March 14, 2019, 03:36:59 PM »

New max on March 12^th: 14.27M km².

Only 7 participants were right with this new value on range 14.125-14.375.
Not me...

jdallen · « **Reply #38 on:** March 14, 2019, 07:41:30 PM »

Quote from: Juan C. García on March 14, 2019, 03:36:59 PM

New max on March 12^th: 14.27M km².

Only 7 participants were right with this new value on range 14.125-14.375.
Not me...

The ice heard my call and need to guess right for once.

Feeltheburn · « **Reply #39 on:** March 15, 2019, 12:23:49 AM »

Quote from: Wherestheice on February 25, 2019, 06:11:00 AM

I’m calling max

Wrong number?

Ktb · « **Reply #40 on:** March 15, 2019, 07:02:15 AM »

After many failed polls, VINDICATION AT LAST

Neven · « **Reply #41 on:** March 15, 2019, 09:17:13 AM »

Darn you, Arctic. You just had to add that extra 0.02 of SIE, didn't you?

Feeltheburn · « **Reply #42 on:** March 23, 2019, 05:16:00 PM »

So 7 of us correctly guessed the high for Jaxa between 14.125 to 14.375.

Thomas Barlow · « **Reply #43 on:** April 03, 2019, 04:19:49 AM »

Quote from: Thomas Barlow on January 30, 2019, 06:06:16 PM

Here is my prediction, based on late January sea-ice thickness.
Don't know what the numbers would be on something like this?

Whoops, wrong thread. That's my prediction for minimum this year.

Paddy · « **Reply #44 on:** April 03, 2019, 08:04:55 AM »

Feel free to start an early poll for minimum if you want, although I don't think we usually run one in April.

News:

Poll

What will be the JAXA maximum this year in million sq km?

Author Topic: January Poll 2019: JAXA Maximum (Read 11418 times)

Pmt111500

Sterks

b_lumenkraft

Thomas Barlow

Thomas Barlow