The 2014 Melting Season

[Bruce]

I might be even more concerned about the heat whipping up Siberian wildfires, with indirect effects of soot affecting Greenland and multi-year ice elsewhere, for years to come.

We've had continuous fires in northern Canada for weeks now. Why not add Siberia for good measure?

[Bruce]

The Big Crack already more or less extends from the Beaufort to the Atlantic, and it continues to fragment and widen.

[Bruce]

I don't get it. This plot indicates that there is 5 meter thick ice pushed up against the Archipelago, but the MODIS image in my previous post shows it crumbling like dried out cupcake.

[Michael Hauber]

Remember the scale of the Arctic.  If you shrank the Arctic down to a lake 3 or 4 km across that 5m ice would be 5 mm thick.  What looks like a tiny floe on MODIS will be 100s of metres or kilometres across.  We've seen semi-permanent ice shelves 10s to 100s of metres thick in both Arctic and Antarctic crumble within days, so no suprise that 5m thick ice may crumble into 'small' pieces given the right conditions.

[jdallen]

The heat *is* torching the Taiga, Tundra, and underlying permafrost, even if it gets stopped short at the shoreline.  It is dumping heat into runoff.  That heat will make it to the arctic. We loose regardless.

[Laurent]

Bruce
There is no more old thick ice there, it may be thick but it is only compacted ice and organized in layers, the layer on the shore is not thick nor old, the last time I saw that, that was on a video with jennifer francis.

15minutes 50s
I remember seeing the layers even better...may be an other video...
Hycom is not precise, it does blur the datas and overestimate the ice...it is normal the purpose is to make sure the boats know what kind of max ice they can encounter.

[silkman]

It really is toasty in Tiksi this week!

http://www.wunderground.com/global/stations/21824.html

[werther]

On Neoguri... The ECMWF charts suggested one or two days ago that the remains of the storm would be steered from the Ochotsk Sea up North over Kolyma-Siberia, along the ridge jutting into the Arctic near Bering Strait.
Like with predecessors in former storm seasons, they play a role in redistribution of tropical heat. This one surely contributes to some real summer heat on the Arctic Ocean shores of Siberia.
But it is not unusual for some days per year to get to 26dC/80dF.
It is always interesting to see if the heat gets to Ostrov Kotelni'y and Wrangel. Then it might really hurt!

[6roucho]

As a statistician (in an unrelated field) it's very interesting watching subject matter experts grapple empirically with a system on the cusp of change. My maths head tells me that when that change comes it will be quite unpredictable from the current data except on very short timescales, and will occur with shocking rapidity. Then we'll try to piece the causal event together. Of course nothing will piece the poor entropic ice pack together.

[Gray-Wolf]

With a major heat pulse over the Russian side of the basin is there not a chance that the heat contrasts will not allow cyclogenisis to occur there producing another big low for late July?

[iceman]

Looking warmer than 2013, I'd say:

Inferring from the Climate Reanalyzer forecast, much of that anomalous warm water drifting up along the North Atlantic Current will move into the southern Barents, well away from the ice edge - as happened for most of the 2013 melt season.

2013 had record ice losses on the Atlantic side.

You mean from the contribution of unusually low ice cover in the Greenland Sea?  That's down to low ice export through Fram Strait, not much to do with SST anomalies.

[iceman]

I don't know how their model comes up with this, as CAPIE has been the highest in the 2005-2014 period for a while now:

Not necessarily inconsistent: Concentration appears to be unusually high, which could have sustained a high (and declining) CAPIE even while melt pond fraction went from low to average.
     I too have some reservations about their model, though: other sources indicate an earlier peak.

[werther]

Iceman, hi,

I think Friv aims at the anomalous deep retreat of the sea ice boundary on the whole front Svalbard - Severnaya Zemlya. IIRC it was almost 500 km N of Frantsa Yosefa start September '13.

[Tor Bejnar]

Bruce,
The "Big Crack" is actually shown on the HYCOM thickness map you show.  It is depicted by a series of red dots (within the black) following parts of the CAA coast.  Very little of the thickest ice is fast ice.  (I think this is a change from a decade ago where there were still ancient ice shelves.)

[Frivolousz21]

Precisely.  The Atlantic side coming this far North is something from what I understand has only been seen in 2012 and 2013.

[iceman]

I think Friv aims at the anomalous deep retreat of the sea ice boundary on the whole front Svalbard - Severnaya Zemlya. IIRC it was almost 500 km N of Frantsa Yosefa start September '13.

Werther, yes, the deep incursion north of Frantsa Yosefa in 2013 was impressive.  For the entire sector north of Svalbard - Severnaya Zemlya, though, it looks like 2012 had lower extent at the minimum.

[ritter]

The heat *is* torching the Taiga, Tundra, and underlying permafrost, even if it gets stopped short at the shoreline.  It is dumping heat into runoff.  That heat will make it to the arctic. We loose regardless.

And touching the permafrost liberates co2 and methane. Yes, we lose regardless.

[Bruce]

Remember the scale of the Arctic.  If you shrank the Arctic down to a lake 3 or 4 km across that 5m ice would be 5 mm thick.  What looks like a tiny floe on MODIS will be 100s of metres or kilometres across.  We've seen semi-permanent ice shelves 10s to 100s of metres thick in both Arctic and Antarctic crumble within days, so no suprise that 5m thick ice may crumble into 'small' pieces given the right conditions.

I guess my point was just that if that's the thickest, supposedly strongest ice in the basin, why is it crumbling so easily when the strain could (presumably) be accommodated by thinner, weaker ice to the north? But I guess if the ice is anchored to the CAA on one side, and the CAB is being rotated, a weak zone has to appear somewhere. But this development really puts to lie the idea that all of that thick multi-year ice is a stronghold against the melting. It's not. By the end of the summer it could all have migrated to the Beaufort and Chukchi, and melted. Or shot out the Fram, if the rotation shifts direction. Or both, as will probably be the case.

The whole ice cap is mobile. It doesn't have to move by internal deformation, it can just float wherever the wind and currents push it. I expect that this year or next we'll see the whole cap pull away from Greenland and the CAA leaving open water in between.

We're basically at the point where there will be first and second year ice, and nothing else.

[Bruce]

You wanted fires in Russia, you got them. The Laptev bite is to the left.

These smoke clouds are staggeringly huge. I wonder if all the smoke from these and the Canadian fires will have a cooling effect by blocking incoming sunlight? At least until the fires go out, the particulates settle out, and all that carbon and albedo darkening soot start to work their magic.

(Sorry, forgot the pic.)

[Bob Wallace]

The whole ice cap is mobile. It doesn't have to move by internal deformation, it can just float wherever the wind and currents push it.

If the relative size of current flow in this graphic is correct there's a lot of flow through the Nares Straight.  That's right in the middle of where the thickest ice is normally found.  A broken up pack of MYI might head out on that route in larger amounts than via the Fram.

[greatdying2]

The whole ice cap is mobile. It doesn't have to move by internal deformation, it can just float wherever the wind and currents push it.

If the relative size of current flow in this graphic is correct there's a lot of flow through the Nares Straight.  That's right in the middle of where the thickest ice is normally found.  A broken up pack of MYI might head out on that route in larger amounts than via the Fram.

True, but... what is that graphic??

[Bruce]

If the relative size of current flow in this graphic is correct there's a lot of flow through the Nares Straight.  That's right in the middle of where the thickest ice is normally found.  A broken up pack of MYI might head out on that route in larger amounts than via the Fram.

Yeah, I've been harping on that point a bit myself. With the ice so fragmented, it offers no resistance to flowing through various straits and into the Atlantic.

That's a great graphic, BTW. It reminds me how important the arctic is as a thermostat, not only for the atmosphere, but also for the oceans. It has a huge influence on keeping the climate stable throughout the year. What happens when that system gets pushed too far and shifts to a new equilibrium? What does that do to the global climate? What if the "equilibrium" happens to be wild oscillations?

It's not smart to run uncontrolled experiments on the very thing upon which you rely for your survival.

[johnm33]

Lurker, "True, but... what is that graphic?? " look here
 http://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/feature/is-global-warming-changing-the-arctic

[JMP]

If the relative size of current flow in this graphic is correct there's a lot of flow through the Nares Straight.  That's right in the middle of where the thickest ice is normally found.  A broken up pack of MYI might head out on that route in larger amounts than via the Fram.

Yeah, I've been harping on that point a bit myself. With the ice so fragmented, it offers no resistance to flowing through various straits and into the Atlantic.

That's a great graphic, BTW. It reminds me how important the arctic is as a thermostat, not only for the atmosphere, but also for the oceans. It has a huge influence on keeping the climate stable throughout the year. What happens when that system gets pushed too far and shifts to a new equilibrium? What does that do to the global climate? What if the "equilibrium" happens to be wild oscillations?

It's not smart to run uncontrolled experiments on the very thing upon which you rely for your survival.

Nares strait is relatively narrow and shallow in spots. This limits the amount of and age of the sea ice that can be exported through.   Yes the Arctic Sea Ice is melting but it probably wont all melt this year. When it does we may then see a few years to follow that do not completely melt out.   There is a great deal of "natural" variability but things are already way out of balance. We do not need to see things worse than they already are. We can imagine many "what if's" but it's best to rely on evidence and for some things we have to wait and see.  Eventually the Northern Hemisphere at least may change to an Equable Climate but that probably will not happen in my lifetime - not before 2070.  http://www.seas.harvard.edu/climate/eli/research/equable/index.html

[greatdying2]

We do not need to see things worse than they already are. We can imagine many "what if's" but it's best to rely on evidence and for some things we have to wait and see.  Eventually the Northern Hemisphere at least may change to an Equable Climate but that probably will not happen in my lifetime - not before 2070.

So... Evidence suggests that the current rate of climatic change may be greater than the previous hundreds of millions of years. And how bad it eventually gets likely still depends on how we humans collectively behave now and, say, over the next generation (or two? after which runaway positive feedbacks may have a more than negligible chance of taking it completely out of our tiny hands). But since the most serious consequences may be, say, a human lifetime away, let's just all tra-la-la and be merry? Move along, nothing to see here?

Am I decoding your message correctly?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle

[greatdying2]

http://www.swerus-c3.geo.su.se/index.php/oerjans-blog-leg-1/139-we-are-in-the-ice

[greatdying2]

Lurker, "True, but... what is that graphic?? " look here
 http://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/feature/is-global-warming-changing-the-arctic

So, the layering of ocean currents (as described in the article you link to: cold & fresh Pacific waters lying above and insulating the ice from warm & dense Atlantic waters) seems to be critical. Is this a stable situation (and if so, why?), or a ticking time bomb?

[Bob Wallace]

Nares strait is relatively narrow and shallow in spots. This limits the amount of and age of the sea ice that can be exported through.   Yes the Arctic Sea Ice is melting but it probably wont all melt this year. When it does we may then see a few years to follow that do not completely melt out.   There is a great deal of "natural" variability but things are already way out of balance. We do not need to see things worse than they already are. We can imagine many "what if's" but it's best to rely on evidence and for some things we have to wait and see.  Eventually the Northern Hemisphere at least may change to an Equable Climate but that probably will not happen in my lifetime - not before 2070. 

You read a lot into my comment which I did not write.

[crandles]

Vilkitsky Strait may be open or opening but even if not quite open yet, there is a big crack along the Northern shore.

http://lance-modis.eosdis.nasa.gov/imagery/subsets/?subset=Arctic_r04c05.2014192.terra.250m

[nukefix]

So... Evidence suggests that the current rate of climatic change may be greater than the previous hundreds of millions of years.

Sorry but that is false. The rate of change was orders of magnitude greater during the end-stages of the last ice age.

[Dromicosuchus]

So... Evidence suggests that the current rate of climatic change may be greater than the previous hundreds of millions of years.

Sorry but that is false. The rate of change was orders of magnitude greater during the end-stages of the last ice age.

...Wait, what?  Temperatures are changing more rapidly now than at any other time in both the thermometer and proxy records; the rise over the twentieth century was ~0.8 C per century, while the most rapid temperature change during the last glacial termination only clocked in at (eyeballing, here, from figure 2 of this paper; I know that's not the most reliable means of estimation, but I'll be within an order of magnitude, and that's easily good enough:  http://sciences.blogs.liberation.fr/files/shakun-et-al.pdf) 1.5 to 2 C per 2,000 years, or 0.075 to 0.1 C per century--a good order of magnitude slower than the current pace.  Are you talking about the rate of sea level rise?  That was faster during the last glacial termination, but the reasons for that (which I'm not entirely clear on myself; different ice sheet dynamics, what with the existence of the low-latitude Laurentide at the time?  A lag in glacial response, that will likely catch up with us very shortly?), whatever they were, were not a similarly rapid climatic response.

[crandles]

Younger_Dryas perhaps

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas

also referred to as the Big Freeze,[1] was a geologically brief (1,300 ± 70 years) period of cold climatic conditions and drought which occurred between approximately 12,800 and 11,500 years BP.[2]
...
Nothing of the size, extent, or rapidity of this period of abrupt climate change has been experienced since.[6]

[greatdying2]

For instance: http://news.stanford.edu/news/2013/august/climate-change-speed-080113.html

PS. The Science issue referenced in the article is here: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/341/6145.toc

(Anyways, that wasn't my point...)

[johnm33]

greatdying2 
"So, the layering of ocean currents (as described in the article you link to: cold & fresh Pacific waters lying above and insulating the ice from warm & dense Atlantic waters) seems to be critical. Is this a stable situation (and if so, why?), or a ticking time bomb?"
My guess is whilst the ice remains to slow the escape of the fresh meltwater, from Siberian and N, American rivers, which peaks in May-June iirc, then things remain stable, but when a broad enough path exists for those waters to circle the pole and exit through the CAA or Fram things change. With no fresh [er] water to force it down the Atlantic waters would circle the pole and the basal waters held back by the pressure of the Atlantic flow would be released. If you zoom into the area between Svalbard and Greenland there seems to be evidence sccoured into the seafloor of just such an event. Or perhaps there's a better geolojical explanation. http://www.arctic.io/zoom/yDzd/0.5;0.5;1/Bathymetry

[Frivolousz21]

The Beaufort region gets hit pretty hard the next few days.

The area to watch the next few days is the Beaufort.

 

The setup is an all out cluster**** until the reverse dipole takes over.

 

For the Canadian Basin it actually means a short term torch/compaction regime.

 

In the first 12 hours of this we can see the ice line already on the move.

From multiple angles.





Three days prior in 2013.

[JMP]

Am I decoding your message correctly?

No. You are not. 

[JMP]

You read a lot into my comment which I did not write.

Well... I wasn’t responding directly to you and maybe I did sorta go off on a tangent there lol   Now, to respond to what you said. 

If the relative size of current flow in this graphic is correct there's a lot of flow through the Nares Straight.  That's right in the middle of where the thickest ice is normally found.  A broken up pack of MYI might head out on that route in larger amounts than via the Fram.

While that graphic may look great at first, the proportions of current flow(s) depicted do seem to be misleading.  Nares strait is extremely unlikely to export more ice than the Fram, multiyear or younger.     In 2007 there was a dramatic increase in export through Nares but that was still only about 10 % of Fram.  It's just too narrow and there is significant ice calving off the glaciers that feed into it which is only likely to increase as the arctic warms.    So... only maybe, would it be possible if/when there is so little ice left that most of what would go out the Fram melts before making it’s way across the top of Greenland.   -The graphic must be a bit off, maybe a lot off. 

[Bob Wallace]

I assume the blue line is proportional to the amount of water flowing through the various outlets.  If the amount flowing through the Nares is roughly the same as through the much wider Fram then the flow (of water) must be fast.

If the thick MYI is breaking into small enough pieces to fit through the Nares it would seem that there would be some major thick ice loss happening right in the middle of the "ice stronghold". 

Smaller pieces of thick ice could cascade through the Nares like pachinko balls in Japanese game parlor.

And looking at today's ARC thickness map it looks as if this is happening.   The last ice holdout could be to the west of Ellesmere

[Dromicosuchus]

Younger_Dryas perhaps

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas

also referred to as the Big Freeze,[1] was a geologically brief (1,300 ± 70 years) period of cold climatic conditions and drought which occurred between approximately 12,800 and 11,500 years BP.[2]
...
Nothing of the size, extent, or rapidity of this period of abrupt climate change has been experienced since.[6]

Ah, mea culpa; I'd forgotten about the Younger Dryas.  Many thanks, Crandles!

[be cause]

You read a lot into my comment which I did not write.

Well... I wasn’t responding directly to you and maybe I did sorta go off on a tangent there lol   Now, to respond to what you said. 

If the relative size of current flow in this graphic is correct there's a lot of flow through the Nares Straight.  That's right in the middle of where the thickest ice is normally found.  A broken up pack of MYI might head out on that route in larger amounts than via the Fram.

While that graphic may look great at first, the proportions of current flow(s) depicted do seem to be misleading.  Nares strait is extremely unlikely to export more ice than the Fram, multiyear or younger.     In 2007 there was a dramatic increase in export through Nares but that was still only about 10 % of Fram.  It's just too narrow and there is significant ice calving off the glaciers that feed into it which is only likely to increase as the arctic warms.    So... only maybe, would it be possible if/when there is so little ice left that most of what would go out the Fram melts before making it’s way across the top of Greenland.   -The graphic must be a bit off, maybe a lot off.

I have been reading Egede's Description of Greenland in which he reports the natives as saying that the current was so strong from the North through Nare's Straight that it did not freeze over
A strong current may have no accompanying  ice flow at all ! As Bob Wallace has shown .. things up north are a changin' !

[greatdying2]

I tried to write a thing (which became a diatribe) about how ridiculous my fellow apes tend to be. But then I deleted it. You will figure it out soon enough by yourselves. God's speed. (There is no god.)

[Bruce]

I tried to write a thing (which became a diatribe) about how ridiculous my fellow apes tend to be. But then I deleted it. You will figure it out soon enough by yourselves. God's speed. (There is no god.)

I imagine any number of us here have written that diatribe at one time or another. I had one going on this thread but, like you, deleted it. I like it here -- people are intelligent and knowledgable and the conversations are civilized. If we were to rise to the bait of every passing troll (or participant we perceive as a troll), it wouldn't stay that way for very long.

[Nightvid Cole]

MODIS for the past 4 days is showing advanced stages of surface melt reaching into the central Arctic on the Siberian and Chukchi sides, to well over 80 degrees North. Yet it seems the Uni-Bremen concentration map isn't responding. What gives?

[Michael Hauber]

http://xkcd.com/1386/

Yes people are stupid....

[greatdying2]

I tried to write a thing (which became a diatribe) about how ridiculous my fellow apes tend to be. But then I deleted it. You will figure it out soon enough by yourselves. God's speed. (There is no god.)

I imagine any number of us here have written that diatribe at one time or another. I had one going on this thread but, like you, deleted it. I like it here -- people are intelligent and knowledgable and the conversations are civilized. If we were to rise to the bait of every passing troll (or participant we perceive as a troll), it wouldn't stay that way for very long.

Absolutely. Most people are here because they genuinely care.

[greatdying2]

Younger_Dryas perhaps

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas

also referred to as the Big Freeze,[1] was a geologically brief (1,300 ± 70 years) period of cold climatic conditions and drought which occurred between approximately 12,800 and 11,500 years BP.[2]
...
Nothing of the size, extent, or rapidity of this period of abrupt climate change has been experienced since.[6]

Ah, mea culpa; I'd forgotten about the Younger Dryas.  Many thanks, Crandles!

Again, *even* the Younger Dryas was likely order(s) of magnitude slower than present changes:
http://news.stanford.edu/news/2013/august/climate-change-speed-080113.html .

[ChrisReynolds]

MODIS for the past 4 days is showing advanced stages of surface melt reaching into the central Arctic on the Siberian and Chukchi sides, to well over 80 degrees North. Yet it seems the Uni-Bremen concentration map isn't responding. What gives?

Not had the chance to check up on the latest Wipneus data, but CT Area continues to fall at average rates. NSIDC extent has swtiched firmly from large falls to average losses - however that often does in mid July.

The ice is thinning, and NSIDC extent might pick up later in July. CT Area however remains puzzling.

[Laurent]

The ice is really grinded by this giant gyre...
1) the break up along the canadian coast is going on...
2) the chanels start to open...
3) big opening perpandicular to the coast, many others to come if the gyre continue as it is...
http://1.usa.gov/U7jCU5

[crandles]

Again, *even* the Younger Dryas was likely order(s) of magnitude slower than present changes:
http://news.stanford.edu/news/2013/august/climate-change-speed-080113.html .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas

It has been believed that the transitions each occurred over a period of a decade or so,[7] but the onset may have been faster.[8] Thermally fractionated nitrogen and argon isotope data from Greenland ice core GISP2 indicate that the summit of Greenland was approximately 15 °C (27 °F) colder during the Younger Dryas[7] than today.

15 °C with onset faster than a decade. Of course this ~15 °C is neither global nor reached during onset decade. Probably difficult to compare a likely regional effect with a global effect. Nevertheless it is pretty dramatic.

While I wouldn't claim this is an order of magnitude faster than present changes, I don't think it looks reasonable to claim the onset of 'the Younger Dryas was likely order(s) of magnitude slower than present changes' 

If you set up your definitions appropriately to downplay regional effects over short periods of less than 100 years and concentrate on global effects then it may be possible to claim

Climate change on pace to occur 10 times faster than any change recorded in past 65 million years 

or by changing the definitions and weightings, to claim

Nothing of the size, extent, or rapidity of this period [Yonger Dryas] of abrupt climate change has been experienced since.

[greatdying2]

If you set up your definitions appropriately to downplay regional effects over short periods of less than 100 years and concentrate on global effects then it may be possible to claim

Climate change on pace to occur 10 times faster than any change recorded in past 65 million years 

or by changing the definitions and weightings, to claim

Nothing of the size, extent, or rapidity of this period [Yonger Dryas] of abrupt climate change has been experienced since.

Fair enough. Globally at least, man-made climate change is set to become faster than at any time since a comet wiped out the dinosaurs.

Inertia toward continued emissions creates potential 21st-century global warming that is comparable in magnitude to that of the largest global changes in the past 65 million years but is orders of magnitude more rapid. The rate of warming implies a velocity of climate change and required range shifts of up to several kilometers per year, raising the prospect of daunting challenges for ecosystems, especially in the context of extensive land use and degradation, changes in frequency and severity of extreme events, and interactions with other stresses.

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/341/6145/486.abstract

Fig. 1 Observed and projected changes in annual temperature and precipitation.
(Top) Climatic Research Unit (CRU) observations (which are available only over land), calculated as 1986–2005 minus 1956–1975. (Middle) Differences in the mid-21st-century period of the CMIP5 RCP8.5 ensemble, calculated as 2046–2065 minus 1986–2005. (Bottom) Differences in the late-21st-century period of the CMIP5 RCP8.5 ensemble, calculated as 2081–2100 minus 1986–2005. We show the multi-model mean, using the model aggregation of Diffenbaugh and Giorgi (65). This presentation does not indicate significant differences from background variability, nor does it reflect many other potentially important sources of uncertainty, including level of emissions, Earth system feedbacks, or model structure. The values at the left and right extremes of the color bars give the minimum and maximum values (respectively) that occur across all of the periods. The minimum temperature, minimum precipitation, and maximum precipitation extreme changes are all in the CRU observations. Further details are provided in the supplementary materials.

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/341/6145/486.figures-only