The 2020 melting season

[BornFromTheVoid]

Thoughts on this as a new colour scheme?

[glennbuck]

Accumulated ice melt energy Anomaly for the Central Arctic is very high, no past years to compare it with in this graph.

[ajouis]

Another element that this August weather has brought is significant cloudiness especially in the pacific half, which means heat excess retention and enhanced melting.
I’d be surprised if Arctic temperatures in August are not well above average.

You've looked at air temperatures just above the ice? This is either not accurate or a very small effect given the positive temperatures being concentrated on the Svalbard side and the negative ones on the Alaskan side

[BornFromTheVoid]

NSIDC daily extent just dipped below the min from 2017 and equaled 2018
Latest projection. The average melt rate would place 2020 at 2^nd lowest, while the slowest melt (2006 still) would result in 5^th lowest. 19/20 produce the 2^nd lowest minimum on record.

We are currently 1,290,000 km² above the 2012 minimum. To beat 2012, extent losses would need to average at least 50,000 km² per day from now until September 16th (2012 minimum date).
The previous record loss for this period was 36,000 km² per day in 2008.

[Macalaga]

5 year lurker here, finally feeling I’ve got enough time in to be able to contribute.

I’ve found the slater model to be uncanny in its predictive ability, especially for season minimum. This year it has *so far* stayed true to this track record as you can see in the attached.

I have wondered if at some point the arctic will have fundamentally changed so much that this model (like others) finally breaks.

The model this year bottoms out just around 4 million which historically sounds very reasonable! But with so much energy in the system that perhaps is beyond the math of the model ... will it be simply too much?

[gandul]

With all due respect, I am not a blind follower of someone that just says “the ice is such and such” and then all repeat.

Sorry I don’t see fractional ice as a step change in 2020, there always has been to greater or lower extent, is my opinion. This year has been exceptionally warm in a trend of warmer and warmer years.

<Softened language. And then removed personal references. O>

[glennbuck]

Will be interesting to see where the DMI 80 North 2M temperatures go for the rest of August.

[wdmn]

It's worth noting that, after another large drop in NSIDC area, compaction remains at record low for the date, and significantly lower than 2012. Surely those who were adamant in late July that this year could well finish behind 2019 are now ready to revise their outlooks?

[igs]

I just can't see extent falling under 3 million, it would take unprecedented ice losses to even break the record nevermind going that low. Also the Beaufort ice will probably remain stubborn especially as the Beaufort high is looking very short lived, a common theme this year.

Agree to the <3M km2, only probable with a major event IMO, while the thing with the beaufort being stubborn:

If you mean "some" of the ice in the beaufort probably remains stubborn I would +1

If you mean "THE" = "ALL" of the ice in the beaufort remains stubborn I'd say no.

Perhaps you want to elaborate which of the two you have in mind.

Have a nice weekend @ALL

[El Cid]

It's not your grandma's arctic anymore. SST anomalies of 2020/08/20 vs 2012, 2016,2019.

The Siberian side is steaming. I wonder how and when those seas will be able to refreeze...(and how much melting effect they produce )

[Freegrass]

Latest Five Day Forecast
Wind @ Surface + Total Precipitable Water
Large GiF!

[cesium62]

Another element that this August weather has brought is significant cloudiness especially in the pacific half, which means heat excess retention and enhanced melting.
I’d be surprised if Arctic temperatures in August are not well above average.

You've looked at air temperatures just above the ice? This is either not accurate or a very small effect given the positive temperatures being concentrated on the Svalbard side and the negative ones on the Alaskan side

Air temperature just above ice is capped at the melting point of that ice and won't tell you anything about excess heat retention nor enhanced melting.  Looking at temperatures in the arctic that are not above the ice will give you some idea whether or not Arctic temperatures in August are well above average.

[oren]

5 year lurker here, finally feeling I’ve got enough time in to be able to contribute.

I’ve found the slater model to be uncanny in its predictive ability, especially for season minimum. This year it has *so far* stayed true to this track record as you can see in the attached.

Welcome macalaga. I personally don't put much weight in Slater's model, but others feel differently. In any case  it can be discussed in more detail in the Slater Model thread.

[ajouis]

Another element that this August weather has brought is significant cloudiness especially in the pacific half, which means heat excess retention and enhanced melting.
I’d be surprised if Arctic temperatures in August are not well above average.

You've looked at air temperatures just above the ice? This is either not accurate or a very small effect given the positive temperatures being concentrated on the Svalbard side and the negative ones on the Alaskan side

Air temperature just above ice is capped at the melting point of that ice and won't tell you anything about excess heat retention nor enhanced melting.  Looking at temperatures in the arctic that are not above the ice will give you some idea whether or not Arctic temperatures in August are well above average.

It is not good in general, however in the specific context, the differential is ample enough to show that the cloudiness in Beaufort/ Chucki didn't lead to higher temperatures/ temperatures retention as claimed by Gandul compared to the rest of the basin, which doesn't mean that temperatures are not above average

[BornFromTheVoid]

First 3 weeks of August.

[grixm]

Thoughts on this as a new colour scheme?

Honestly it's not so good on the eyes, I think. The contrast between cyan and green is unpleasant. And also dark gray ocean is not intuitive either, I associate gray with invalid or irrelevant data such as land in the case of ice, not the value 0.

[D-Penguin]

First 3 weeks of August.

I agree with grixm regarding the contrast between cyan and green. I am happy with WHITE Land Mass, GREY Sea and RED Ice Loss.

Never-the-less, side by side synchronized graph and visual - it just keeps getting better! What a technique this would be for a comparative of all of the metrics.
+1

[UCMiami]

Nice graphic and the best representation of the retreat of the Atlantic front along a very long line. Because it is retaining the same shape and retreating at almost identical speed from Greenland to Asia it is easy to miss when the significant loss on a daily or even weekly view is small - seeing the final 3 week difference is eye opening.

On a separate point - talk of a paradigm shift in 2020 is a tad hyperbolic - there was certainly such a shift either in 2007 or 2012 whichever year you prefer but it is difficult to identify the next one until we have the perspective of following years to see whether this year is a continuation of a trend or has actually created some new state of arctic ice.

Currently this year is tracking within the range of previous years and exhibits fluctuations similar to previous years based primarily on the vagaries of weather. There has been a clearly identifiable trend in terms of decreases in older ice, extent, area, and volume over this past 15 years, but as of yet nothing exceptional this year. Should the melt season throw surprises into the last month it might represent something new and different - a late minimum, a sudden crash, or even just a long string of near century drops this late are all possible surprises.

I just think the use of terms like paradigm shift are injudicious as they can be turned into meaningless arguments to discredit or obfuscate the undeniable science.

[BornFromTheVoid]

Thanks for the feedback all.

Thoughts on this version?

[glennbuck]

Thanks for the feedback all.

Thoughts on this version?

Yep that looks great, maybe a darker colour for the land to highlight the coastline/island ice.

.

[interstitial]

Every body will like something different. I want to be able to see ranges.
0% dark blue ocean
1%  Red
transition
30% Orange
transition
60% Yellow
transition
90% White
>90% White

[Lord M Vader]

Eyeballing the DMI graph shows signs that the high Arctic finally is going to cool down. From EC 12z run it seems to be a slow process. We shall see.

[oren]

All, please try to focus on the actual melting season. Discussions of upcoming freezing season, and what is expected next year, are speculations better belonging in another thread.

[gandul]

Eyeballing the DMI graph shows signs that the high Arctic finally is going to cool down. From EC 12z run it seems to be a slow process. We shall see.

Very slow.
Judging from the next trustable 96h, the Arctic will see rain and cloudiness over the CAB, also a really strong push of warmer air from Atlantic side / Eurasia and mild compacting winds over the Beaufort sea.

[glennbuck]

The North pole today, 40 miles North is open water and 120 Miles North a larger area is opening up. From the true North Pole all direction point south.

Leads at the N. Pole, even substantial ones, are not that unusual.

When we have open water at the N pole, and no ice within 100km, then it will be notable.

This is open water is that a better picture and more notable from the polarstern.

Sometimes shots from worldview show possible future events and are worth posting. North Pole Worldview posted in the melting season thread 4th August.

Photograph taken from the Polarstern at 12:45 pm on August 19, 2020 as the ship reached the North Pole. There are lots of melt ponds, and the ice that is left looks very thin.

[Paul]

I just can't see extent falling under 3 million, it would take unprecedented ice losses to even break the record nevermind going that low. Also the Beaufort ice will probably remain stubborn especially as the Beaufort high is looking very short lived, a common theme this year.

Agree to the <3M km2, only probable with a major event IMO, while the thing with the beaufort being stubborn:

If you mean "some" of the ice in the beaufort probably remains stubborn I would +1

If you mean "THE" = "ALL" of the ice in the beaufort remains stubborn I'd say no.

Perhaps you want to elaborate which of the two you have in mind.

Have a nice weekend @ALL

Yep, I expect further reductions in the diffused concentrated area but the general arm of ice is likely to remain albeit probably a bit smaller than it is now.

Got to remember why 2012 went so low is because of late Atlantification during September, the signs are there on worldview when looking at 2012 with ice in the Laptev quite diffused. The ice this year has already suffered extreme Atlantification which I did not expect at the start of this melt season.

I expect the DMI graph to go down somewhat, models want to try and develop some half hearted cold to the north of Greenland but other parts of the basin still looking well above average.

[marcel_g]

Thanks for the feedback all.

Thoughts on this version?

I like this one. Maybe like interstitial is saying though some kind of colour differentiation for general bands of ice concentration? Not sure about what colours to use there though.

[Rod]

This is a good question, and snipping comments is not the best way to handle a forum. If you think someone is out of line, punish them or suspend them from posting for a few days, but don’t rewrite their comments. We should be able to see what people have said.

<Removed all the personal references after further consideration. O>

[SteveMDFP]

Most contributors choose to remain anonymous.  There's nothing wrong with that, and it may be prudent, in many cases.

Announcing to the whole Forum that you want to know the identity of another participant is inappropriate.  in my view, it's grounds for banishment.  But I'm not in charge here. 

<Removed all personal references. O>

[Rod]

Announcing to the whole Forum that you want to know the identity of another participant is inappropriate.  in my view, it's grounds for banishment.  But I'm not in charge here. 

Hmmm OK.

<Sorry had to remove inappropriate parts. O>

[weatherdude88]

Very slow.
Judging from the next trustable 96h, the Arctic will see rain and cloudiness over the CAB, also a really strong push of warmer air from Atlantic side / Eurasia and mild compacting winds over the Beaufort sea.

Parts of the CAB are forecast to have bit of snow this week. Surface temperatures may be several degrees below freezing in some isolated areas over the next several days.

[D-Penguin]

I just think the use of terms like paradigm shift are injudicious as they can be turned into meaningless arguments to discredit or obfuscate the undeniable science.
I just think the use of terms like paradigm shift are injudicious as they can be turned into meaningless arguments to discredit or obfuscate the undeniable science.

I fully understand the concerns that you express concerning the terminology.

However, the current quality of the ice is now of a different order albeit that the quantity metrics may not be so; herein is the problem related to the science. The science in the observation of events that provides the data for the different metrics by way of the available technology and the interpretation of that data is not sufficiently sensitive to represent the actuality of events. Hence, we see the scientific modelling based on the historical data constantly being revised in the peer reviewed papers towards a closer match to the qualitative reality that we observe.

To the best of my knowledge, there is no scientific data that quantifies and explains the heat energy gain in the Arctic system and dispersion of ice 'observed' in 2020, hence the use of the term 'paradigm shift'. Is the qualitative evidence less valid than the quantitative evidence (the science)?

IMO there will be no rebound from 2020 as was the case with previously recorded minima, hence again the use of the term 'paradigm shift'.

To me a change in the state of a system is a 'paradigm shift'.

Do we simply wait for the science to tell us that the Arctic ocean is now ice free?

What happens if the BOE is a singular event and not part of a progression of events? In such a scenario, waiting for the science to confirm the event, would bring relevance of the science in to question and 'too late was the cry' would be entirely justified.

We have to get beyond the data of 2020 IF we are to adequately prepare for the future
PS With apologizes to oren for linking the 2020 melt season to the future.

[Rodius]

Announcing to the whole Forum that you want to know the identity of another participant is inappropriate.  in my view, it's grounds for banishment.  But I'm not in charge here. 

Hmmm OK. <snipped>

Anonimity could be extremely important to people. Exposing a climate scientist could cost them their job, funding, public attention that could mean deniers targeting said person and more.

Nobody gets to tell others whether they want to remain anonymous or not.

[Rod]

Fair enough.  What got me fired up was gandul asked a question and Oren snipped it.
I don’t know why <someone> should be treated any different than anyone else. But, I will let it go.

<Removed personal references. O>

[bill kapra]

Thanks for the feedback all.

Thoughts on this version?

I like this one much better!

[morganism]

Would b cool 2 c the transitions of thicknesses as a 3-D stretch gradient shading. Should be a lasso tool selection on the data map possible.

Wondering if the Beaufort compression weather upcoming is going to press the whole ice cube tray into the garlic press. It sounds like a cooking recipe,

"add a shelf of MY glacial ice while you stir constantly at medium heat, then add in the ice bath to firm the mold"

[oren]

To be clear: it is NOT appropriate to try and expose users who prefer anonymity, or to challenge them.
(Written in response to discussion now deleted or snipped).
I WILL snip comments when needed. I don't do it much, probably not enough, but I have seen what happens when things are left untended. Comments that could be inflammatory to others or even to one other user will usually get edited before the inevitable backlash and mutual offense taken. It is my professional opinion that this comment "don’t rewrite their comments. We should be able to see what people have said" is wrong. Some statements can be toxic. Sometimes I will just edit out some derogatory words and leave the rest intact. Sometimes I might remove whole sentences (e.g. conspiracy or denial) or even the whole comment (rare).

(Removed part where I discussed the specific issue).

End of discussion, and please leave well enough alone. No need to defend users against my heavy-handed treatment, I have my own inner voice, and if you think some wrong has been done PM me instead of burdening the forum.

[ArcticMelt2]

How likely is it that the 2012 record will be broken? This year the ice has receded much further from the Franz Josef Islands, and the remnants of the ice in the Beaufort Sea, the Canadian Archipelago and the Greenland Sea will soon be dying.

[Aluminium]

Yesterday the Sun was two times closer to the celestial equator compared to solstice. Normal temperature is falling after it. However, given the forecast, this year is going to delay. Winds north of the Laptev Sea will try to do some damage in the CAB.

[ArcticMelt2]

Exact comparison

[Freegrass]

Latest Five Day Forecast
Wind + Temp @ Surface
Large GiF!

[ArcticMelt2]

https://twitter.com/AlaskaWx/status/1296850200800014336

Regional sea ice extent rankings around the Arctic basin for August 20, 2020 compared to same date since 1979. Eurasian side and the central Arctic #seaice extent is very low, North America/Greenland less so.

[glennbuck]

Rick Thoman
@AlaskaWx

 
@Climatologist49
 
Combined June and July temperature departures from 1981-2010 average.

[ArcticMelt2]

Does this count correctly? If so, how little solid ice remains in the Arctic.

[ArcticMelt2]

https://sites.google.com/site/arcticseaicegraphs/regional
Beaufort Sea 800k
Chukchi Sea 400k
East Siberian Sea 200k
Greenland Sea 250k
Canadian Archipelago 350k
Total 2000k


Possible drop to 2800k. Now such an extent is in the Central Arctic.

[BornFromTheVoid]

Updates for today, plus a second concentration images with categories grouped in 10s.

[Neven]

At this time of the season, any sustained pressure gradient will have an impact on the ice. It will be interesting to see how much the ice can be pushed northwards in the coming week, from the direction of Severnaya Zemlya to the Pole (more or less, not straight to it):

[oren]

All, after further consideration I have now deleted or snipped all recent discussion pertaining to a specific user. No one should wake up and find themselves discussed all over the season thread. Whoever missed said discussion, never mind.
Thanks to all who used "report to moderator" today, the advice is helpful.
If anyone feels wronged PM me, don't abuse this thread. For general discussion please head to the forum decorum thread, hopefully not discussing ad hominem but general principles as much as possible.

[gandul]

At this time of the season, any sustained pressure gradient will have an impact on the ice. It will be interesting to see how much the ice can be pushed northwards in the coming week, from the direction of Severnaya Zemlya to the Pole (more or less, not straight to it):

That’s the region that suffered most under the GAAC, very thinned, broken and hollowed ice by melt ponds (or what is lately expressed as the so-called “fractional ice”). If this is true, and I don’t really doubt it for this sector of the CAB, we should see the ice pack edge retreat to well beyond 85N. The North Pole? Would make the news (second page)

[Tom_Mazanec]

I think that the fact that 2020 seems to be coming in second is almost as scary as if it were heading for a record. 2012 was a freak, but each normal year is getting lower and eventually we will pass 2012, even if there is not another cyclone or something.