Arctic Sea Ice : Forum

Cryosphere => Arctic sea ice => Topic started by: Juan C. García on May 09, 2016, 08:05:35 AM

Title: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Juan C. García on May 09, 2016, 08:05:35 AM
Knowing that NSIDC and Cryosphere Today are having problems, one of the great sources for Sea Ice Extent is the Japanese group ADS-JAXA, formerly known also as IJIS.
This ADS-JAXA extent poll will run for 10 days (until May 19th). Until then you can change your vote. There will be a new poll next month.

These are the daily September minimums (in millions km2):

1980's Avg:   7.23
1990's Avg:   6.55
2000's Avg:   5.48
2003:   5.93
2004:   5.68
2005:   5.18
2006:   5.63
2007:   4.07
2008:   4.50
2009:   5.05
2010:   4.62
2011:   4.27
2012:   3.18
2013:   4.81
2014:   4.88
2015:   4.26

You can use the comment thread below to motivate your choice, but discuss various SIE data sets in this dedicated thread (https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,230.0.html).
You can also see the actual graph published by ADS  here (https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/vishop-extent.html?N).
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: abbottisgone on May 09, 2016, 08:51:34 AM
I guessed between 4.0 and 4.25, retaining a mustard seed of faith!
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Juan C. García on May 09, 2016, 09:20:21 AM
I don't want to jump the gun here, it's up to Neven, but can we start the polls on the minimum soon?  I know we have limited sources of data this year unfortunately.  I will throw in my totally uneducated and intuitive vote but I really want to know what all you knowledgeable people are predicting.  Thoughts?  Is it too soon?
At this point, I'd say the best we can do is probabilities, not absolute predictions.  There is too much which can change, it's too stochastic.

But to humor your intent, let me post this.

Baseline averages              2003-2015   2007-2015
2003-2015 Average Loss         7804249         8243351
5/8 2016 Extent                      11782166     11782166
2003-2015 Loss STDEV            862377          580786
+2                                             5702671       4700387
+1                                             4840294       4119601
Average                                     3977917       3538815
-1                                              3115540       2958029
-2                                              2253163       2377243

So, if we use 2007+ as our baseline, we've got pretty close to a 50% chance of passing 2012.  I'd say that's the best we can predict at this point.

Either baseline, we have close to a 66% chance of beating 2007/2011/2015.  I'd say that's the best prediction we can make at this point.

From my point of view, I think that we have 50% chance to be at the same level of 2012. And I should say that It concerns me. I cannot accept that the Arctic sea ice is at completly bad shape at this moment and the media does not seem to care.

It is also worrisome if there is an increase in sea level rise, with an increase of melting at Greenland, like it happened at 2012.

Anyway, I vote at the 3.00-3.25 interval, that will be similar to 2012.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Okono on May 09, 2016, 09:27:13 AM
This is enormously parlous to predict, more so than in prior years, because the ice is doing many novel things right now.  The uncertainty is just too much for me to make any SWAG, so I went for under 1.5m km^2 just for fun.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: abbottisgone on May 09, 2016, 09:34:52 AM
This is enormously parlous to predict, more so than in prior years, because the ice is doing many novel things right now.  The uncertainty is just too much for me to make any SWAG, so I went for under 1.5m km^2 just for fun.
As my Grandfather said: all you've got in this world is your health and sense of humour!

(Where is the 'gulp' emoticon when you need it  ???)
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Watching_from_Canberra on May 09, 2016, 10:48:04 AM
This isn't particularly scientific, but I took today's JAXA sea ice extent graph and simply cut/pasted the 2000's average trajectory on to the end of the 2016 line.  Essentially, I just cut off the plots after today's date and moved them down.  As it happens, the 2000's average and 2012 figure almost coincide for today's date.  This is convenient because it shows two different possible trajectories from today.

I drew a box across to the axis to indicate where the adjusted minima occur.  If the rest of 2016 follows the 2000's average trajectory, the minimum occurs at approximately 4.5 million km2.  If the rest of 2016 follows the 2012 trajectory, the minimum occurs at just over 2 million km2.

https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/vishop-extent.html?N

Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: abbottisgone on May 09, 2016, 11:01:56 AM
This isn't particularly scientific, but I took today's JAXA sea ice extent graph and simply cut/pasted the 2000's average trajectory on to the end of the 2016 line.  Essentially, I just cut off the plots after today's date and moved them down.  As it happens, the 2000's average and 2012 figure almost coincide for today's date.  This is convenient because it shows two different possible trajectories from today.

I drew a box across to the axis to indicate where the adjusted minima occur.  If the rest of 2016 follows the 2000's average trajectory, the minimum occurs at approximately 4.5 million km2.  If the rest of 2016 follows the 2012 trajectory, the minimum occurs at just over 2 million km2.

https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/vishop-extent.html?N
What a perfect way to illustrate how much of an anomaly 2012 was...

Jokes aside, I was reading nevens blog today and I think Wayne was saying how 1998 really was the demarcation point to recent history's foray into a new Arctic sea ice domain... The implication being that big el ninos (  ??? Que mi hablar amigos?) are permanent change!

Could it be because I've just recently got into writing cryptic crosswords..... Just saying!
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: 6roucho on May 09, 2016, 11:05:41 AM
This is enormously parlous to predict, more so than in prior years, because the ice is doing many novel things right now.  The uncertainty is just too much for me to make any SWAG, so I went for under 1.5m km^2 just for fun.
It's becoming a gamble now, with picking the timing of a possible state change being like picking the timing of top of a market. When in doubt, presume the market has turned. In which case, lowball guesstimates are as worthwhile as any other. I still went for 2-2.25 though, using similar reasoning to Watching From Canberra.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: DoomInTheUK on May 09, 2016, 11:44:36 AM
I see, the second Neven goes on holiday a poll suddenly springs up! ;D

I went for just under 2012 - but the caveat is that it'll be thin, broken up and just about hanging on. The way the last few years have gone though I feel I could make a reasonable argument for just about any figure.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: 6roucho on May 09, 2016, 12:11:46 PM
It's in the lap of the weather.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Jim Pettit on May 09, 2016, 12:59:21 PM
This isn't particularly scientific, but I took today's JAXA sea ice extent graph and simply cut/pasted the 2000's average trajectory on to the end of the 2016 line.  Essentially, I just cut off the plots after today's date and moved them down.  As it happens, the 2000's average and 2012 figure almost coincide for today's date.  This is convenient because it shows two different possible trajectories from today.

I drew a box across to the axis to indicate where the adjusted minima occur.  If the rest of 2016 follows the 2000's average trajectory, the minimum occurs at approximately 4.5 million km2.  If the rest of 2016 follows the 2012 trajectory, the minimum occurs at just over 2 million km2.

https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/vishop-extent.html?N (https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/vishop-extent.html?N)

FWIW, I maintain a graph that does all that work for you:

(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.prntscr.com%2Fimg%3Furl%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FUDYY4Nk.png&hash=19dc4b1521a95e0dd3b43a4afad31f0d)
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Watching_from_Canberra on May 09, 2016, 01:25:24 PM
Thanks - that's much more useful.  I had noticed that graph on the daily graphs page but hadn't appreciated what it was doing.  Looking at that suggests a reasonable possibility of record low.  Certainly wouldn't bet the house on it though.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: abbottisgone on May 09, 2016, 02:35:28 PM
Thanks - that's much more useful.  I had noticed that graph on the daily graphs page but hadn't appreciated what it was doing.  Looking at that suggests a reasonable possibility of record low.  Certainly wouldn't bet the house on it though.
I especially like the note: so thoughtful  ;D
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: magnamentis on May 09, 2016, 03:12:11 PM
just for the records, game on  8)  ;)

My Vote: Between 2.75 and 3.0 million km2
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: OldLeatherneck on May 09, 2016, 03:50:04 PM
While it's a bit early to predict anything with certainty, I stuck my neck out and selected 2.75 - 3.0.

My only rationale for this is that the stage seems set for well above average losses in the very near-term.  According to my simplistic modelling, if 2016 losses from today forward till early September exceed average losses by 10%, it would be essentially tied with 2012. I can see a path for greater losses than that.

Fasten your seat belts, it's going to be a wild ride this year!!
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: seaicesailor on May 09, 2016, 04:45:16 PM
3.25 - 3.50 Mkm2, initial guess.
Initial momentum for Arctic ice meltdown.
But, plenty of resilient ice within 80N+ and piled up from CAB toward ESS.
Plus, the old ice at Beaufort is far from the coast and will take much time to melt.
Plus, the GAC was a black swan until demonstrated otherwise.
So close to 2012 but not below.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: crandles on May 09, 2016, 05:10:05 PM
I like Rob Dekkers work indicating snow cover is important
eg http://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2013/07/problematic-predictions-2.html (http://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2013/07/problematic-predictions-2.html)
as submitted to SIPN: https://www.arcus.org/files/sio/23168/dekker_june2015.pdf (https://www.arcus.org/files/sio/23168/dekker_june2015.pdf)

Snow cover looks very low this year so I don't see any reason not to expect a big melt. Went for 2.75-3 (though I have done any calculations using this method to see what it suggests.)
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: AmbiValent on May 09, 2016, 05:24:41 PM
I went for 2.25 -2.5. Could easily be more, but could also be less. I think there will be a strong core of thick ice north of the CAA and Greenland to the North Pole, and I'm at least 80% sure that both passages will be open, given the ice in Kara and Beaufort is already under heavy attack. Other than that, I think it will heavily depend on the weather.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: oren on May 09, 2016, 05:27:28 PM
Whoever started the poll, could you please enable editing?

I voted for 3.50-3.75 but after watching the graphs I will change to 3.25-3.50 .
I believe 2012 was an anomaly with the GAC doing most of the anomalous work. Certainly something like that could return this year, and in that case a blue arctic could be in the cards; but I think the more probable path is an above-normal melting season starting from an already low point, and ending beyond all other years except the GAC year.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Juan C. García on May 09, 2016, 05:48:00 PM
Whoever started the poll, could you please enable editing?

I don´t know why we are unable to change our vote. I am sure that I choosed the option in which we can change the vote, but it is not working and the poll edit page does not give me the option to change this variable.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Archimid on May 09, 2016, 05:50:08 PM
I guess I'm the first to bet on 0. It's  a good pick I think. Here is why

1. Just like  "greater than 5", it only has one side. Once its reached I win(but we all lose).

2. EL niño is still going on and with chances of coming back. Even if we get a la niña, it will be moderate and so far running late, so the atmosphere will remain much warmer than average for at least the early summer, increasing the chances for all kinds of crazy weather.

3. From what I gather here and everywhere else, this winter was unprecedented in the scientific record. Of course the same could be said for  many years in the record,  the record is not old enough and the ice has been shrinking since the begging of records. But still, the severity of it coupled with SST's of the Pacific and Atlantic make it particularly unprecedented.


Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: jplotinus on May 09, 2016, 06:23:52 PM
1.75-2.00 here. I hope it's not that bad, but if a "1" handle should occur, the chances that even mainstream media might begin to "get it" will be increased.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Glenn Tamblyn on May 09, 2016, 07:15:15 PM
I went for 3.0-3.25

Extent is ahead of every other year and volume is near record lows. And the state of the ice makes it look vulnerable.So at first glance you would think a record likely. But. 2012 was unlike other years. Instead of the curve starting to bottom out around mid/late August, 2012 kept descending sharply. To be confident of beating 2012 we would need something similar this year - Jim Pettit's graph highlights that.

If something like that were to happen this year, a new record is possible.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Tor Bejnar on May 09, 2016, 07:18:57 PM
Using Jim Pettit's graphed projections, I went for half-way between the 2007 and 2012 possibilities (just over 2.5 m km^2).
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Vergent on May 09, 2016, 07:41:23 PM
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FoBFyQYM.png&hash=d2364e95d890ba90f71e1d20f38bcf8b)
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: OSweetMrMath on May 09, 2016, 09:51:19 PM
I usually make predictions for the monthly ice extent based on the NSIDC, not the daily extent based on JAXA. I am considering setting up predictions from JAXA because of the satellite problems affecting the NSIDC data. Until then, we can still do some comparisons. Based on the March data, my prediction for the NSIDC monthly extent in December was 4.7 million sq km, around the same level as in 2008. We don't have official NSIDC data for April yet, but all other sources show the April ice as low. However, after adjusting for the trend, ice extent in April does not have a large impact on ice extent in September.

Therefore, I am currently predicting that the JAXA daily minimum extent will be slightly below the 2008 minimum, or 4.25 - 4.5 million sq km. Based on my model, 4.0 - 4.25 would also be a reasonable prediction. The prediction error is large enough that much lower extents (3.0 or so) are not impossible, but my model does not justify predictions at that level at this time.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: werther on May 09, 2016, 10:20:06 PM
I voted in the 3.75-4 Mkm2 box. It is a mean September value. It could get slightly lower on the minimum day.
I expect this to be a preppers' year, much like '10 or '11. Volume will be severely hit. But there's still an awful lot of it to be crushed.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: P-maker on May 10, 2016, 12:27:47 AM
This year bears resemblance to other remarkable years. I base my guess of 2.1 (+/- 0.6)  x 10E6 km2) on the following indicators:

1)   May SSTs are well above average in the Caribbean, which normally leads to excessive ice loss in the Arctic in September
2)   May snow cover in the NH has never been lower, which normally leads to excessive melt ponds in the Arctic
3)   Ice extent in the peripheral seas has never been lower, and the ice has never been thinner
4)   1998, 2007 and 2016 were all heavily influenced by ongoing/vanishing  El Nino events
5)   2016 NH late summer may be heavily influenced by tropical cyclones  lifting warm air into the Arctic
6)   2016 NH wild fires will be shading the mid-latitudes and darkening the remaining Arctic snow surfaces
7)   2016 will provide surprises hitherto un-observed by man, which will take us all by surprise
8)   2012 was the odd year heavily influenced by the late season GAC, thus of no statistical significance
9)   2016 will provide the new base load figure for Arctic sea ice extent – leading to a total collapse in 2025 (5 year average < 1 million square km).

Cheers P
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: AbruptSLR on May 10, 2016, 12:46:27 AM
I voted between 2.0 and 2.25 million km2; because I expect a Great Arctic Cyclone of 2016 to do some damage before mid-summer:
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: P-maker on May 10, 2016, 12:54:25 AM
ASL,

I'm always open for a GAC, but please remember that an early, mid-summer and late GAC will impact Arctic sea ice extent in a completely different manner.

As long as we agree on the numbers, I have no problem discussing the details of how we get there.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: AbruptSLR on May 10, 2016, 01:17:19 AM
ASL,

I'm always open for a GAC, but please remember that an early, mid-summer and late GAC will impact Arctic sea ice extent in a completely different manner.

As long as we agree on the numbers, I have no problem discussing the details of how we get there.

By the end of July I expect a fair amount of open water in the Arctic Ocean, so that by the first week in August a GAC can thrive at the ice/water boundary for some time and stir-up deeper warmer water to surface that might continue ice extent loss after the solar intensity starts to diminish.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Carex on May 10, 2016, 02:45:55 AM
I will throw my penny in the just under 2.0 pot.  I am going low because for the last two years the ice has been in poor condition and vulnerable to an Arctic storm.  I don't think we will dodge the bullet again, I'm betting on two significant storms.  Now it the chicken will just poop on my square.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: abbottisgone on May 10, 2016, 03:58:47 AM
1.75-2.00 here. I hope it's not that bad, but if a "1" handle should occur, the chances that even mainstream media might begin to "get it" will be increased.
If it's under 2.00 I bet Trump will be doing some serious talking points on it!

Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: anotheramethyst on May 10, 2016, 08:05:05 AM
I said between 2.5 and 2.75 partly because of the crazy start and partly because of the similarity to the 1998 el niño.  While 1998 did seem to usher in a new era of sea ice, I don't think every monster niño will necessarily do that.  There was a lot more multiyear ice to destroy back then.  I do think this year will be lowest on record, but I make no predictions about next year.  ;D
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: abbottisgone on May 10, 2016, 08:19:16 AM
I said between 2.5 and 2.75 partly because of the crazy start and partly because of the similarity to the 1998 el niño.  While 1998 did seem to usher in a new era of sea ice, I don't think every monster niño will necessarily do that.  There was a lot more multiyear ice to destroy back then.  I do think this year will be lowest on record, but I make no predictions about next year.  ;D
Why would there being more multi-year ice back then make any difference to whether monster el ninos keep having a permanent effect?
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: seaicesailor on May 10, 2016, 08:35:30 AM
I said between 2.5 and 2.75 partly because of the crazy start and partly because of the similarity to the 1998 el niño.  While 1998 did seem to usher in a new era of sea ice, I don't think every monster niño will necessarily do that.  There was a lot more multiyear ice to destroy back then.  I do think this year will be lowest on record, but I make no predictions about next year.  ;D
Why would there being more multi-year ice back then make any difference to whether monster el ninos keep having a permanent effect?

It makes sense. 1998 much more abundant MYI would resist much better the NH warmth of this year.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: anotheramethyst on May 10, 2016, 08:51:31 AM
I guess I wasn't clear.  Basically I was thinking 1998 melted a lot of multi year ice which would weaken the arctic in following summers as well.  Unfortunately, now there is hardly any multi year ice, so theoretically we could see a blue ocean event and then have it all refreeze to first year ice in the winter, which isn't too different from the ice we have now.  I could be wrong, of course.  There are other feedbacks that could kick in instead.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: abbottisgone on May 10, 2016, 08:56:59 AM
I suppose you're both right: I was trying to get you to put it in words and I was hoping to come up with a different angle on the whole idea by the time you responded.

I suppose I can't think of a legitimately alternative opinion: tho I am still working on it... can you hear my mind wirring?

 ;D
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: abbottisgone on May 10, 2016, 09:05:44 AM
(...this is where I'm at on this,)

- the monster el ninos are a product of climate change themselves(...my assumption)
- with the end of multiyear ice we are saying there will be no more increases in the size of el ninos?? (..my supposition of what we are apparently trying to say!)

That second bit is the bit I can't wrap my laughing gear around,... so I continue to think what must happen.....

I see the end of multi year ice and the so called blue arctic as producing extra large el ninos i.e. bigger than what we have now,... heat is the last form of energy and it must impact in some way! Whilst there is multi-year ice to destroy it has been busy doing that: now what will it do? It can't just disappear with no impact!

That's my thinking at the moment... :o
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: abbottisgone on May 10, 2016, 09:16:00 AM
Does first year ice need multi-year ice for structural integrity in anyway?

Assuming it does, then the loss of multi year ice permanently affects the ability of first year ice to , um,... I don't know: but it surely must do something!

  8) 8) THIS IS WHERE I'M STUCK  8) 8)

I'm assuming multi year ice does something,... but what?

...what is the function of multi-year ice?

(I believe this is a thought experiment, btw!)

... the answer must be to dampen the waves in the arctic waters which will permanently break up thin ice and produce monster el ninos via a permanently massive reduction in albedo.

 -> AND THERE I WAS THINKING ONLY CHEMICAL CHANGE WAS PERMANENT!!
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: magnamentis on May 10, 2016, 09:48:20 AM
I said between 2.5 and 2.75 partly because of the crazy start and partly because of the similarity to the 1998 el niño.  While 1998 did seem to usher in a new era of sea ice, I don't think every monster niño will necessarily do that.  There was a lot more multiyear ice to destroy back then.  I do think this year will be lowest on record, but I make no predictions about next year.  ;D
Why would there being more multi-year ice back then make any difference to whether monster el ninos keep having a permanent effect?

no idea why there was more MYI back then, perhaps it was colder? Fact is that there definitely was a lot more multi year ice in 1998 than nowadays and that it was a lot thicker and more compact, even colder, hence stronger ;)
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: DavidR on May 10, 2016, 11:26:38 AM
Comparing this poll with the June poll last year only 20% of voters predicted a record minimum then. (Spoiler alert) This years percentage is somewhat higher.

Last years poll had less voters in total than this one has so far.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: crandles on May 10, 2016, 12:26:41 PM
Does first year ice need multi-year ice for structural integrity in anyway?

Assuming it does, then the loss of multi year ice permanently affects the ability of first year ice to , um,... I don't know: but it surely must do something!

  8) 8) THIS IS WHERE I'M STUCK  8) 8)

I'm assuming multi year ice does something,... but what?


Old MYI is generally fresher making it harder to melt and thickened through compression, ridging and slabbing.

It is easy to find quotes like
Quote
“The region is covered almost completely by seasonal or first-year ice—ice that has formed since last September,” said Meier. “This ice is thinner and weaker than the older, multi-year ice, so it responds more readily to winds and is more easily broken up.”


It is easy to jump to the conclusion that because the thinner FYI is weaker we get more ridging and thus more of this thicker deformed ice to replace the thick MYI. However it seems plausible there is another factor, time. MYI lasting longer than a decade was not uncommon so there was lots of time for it to thicken through ridging and slabbing processes. Now little of the ice survives as long as 5 years so there is less time for such thickening processes.

With competing effects, it isn't easy to prognosticate.

Perhaps age effect has run its course with low levels of old ice having levelled off in the last few years:
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnsidc.org%2Farcticseaicenews%2Ffiles%2F2016%2F04%2FFig8-350x604.png&hash=ebfd0372f721529222ab6658280a9225)
However even that could be an uncertain conclusion due to ice being categorised as the age of the oldest ice within it.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: 6roucho on May 10, 2016, 03:15:31 PM
I said between 2.5 and 2.75 partly because of the crazy start and partly because of the similarity to the 1998 el niño.  While 1998 did seem to usher in a new era of sea ice, I don't think every monster niño will necessarily do that.  There was a lot more multiyear ice to destroy back then.  I do think this year will be lowest on record, but I make no predictions about next year.  ;D
Why would there being more multi-year ice back then make any difference to whether monster el ninos keep having a permanent effect?

no idea why there was more MYI back then, perhaps it was colder? Fact is that there definitely was a lot more multi year ice in 1998 than nowadays and that it was a lot thicker and more compact, even colder, hence stronger ;)
My understanding is that old ice export through the Fram used to be offset by new ice growth in the Beaufort Gyre, where perennial ice could persist for years, and thus become multi-year ice in its turn. Warmer waters in the southern part of the Gyre have interrupted this incubator process. This year I guess we can hypothesize that it doesn't work that way any more.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Siffy on May 10, 2016, 03:25:55 PM
I picked between 0.5 and 0.75. I've only been watching Arctic for a few years but looking through all the MODIS images I've not seen any year where it looks like every where is melting out at a decent rate like this one and more importantly where GFS temperature maps show consistently above average temperatures almost every where in the Arctic.

The forecast for the next seven days looks fairly brutal as well with most of the snow cover over the Beaufort sea ice, Chukchi sea ice and ESS getting torched. All this in mid may well before peak insolation.

Looks like a massive amount more energy will be absorbed this year in comparison to others. Not to mention the already very large surface area of open water in the Beaufort.

I really don't understand all the posts which are acting like this will be a 'priming' year and won't breach the 2012 record. I mean yea it's totally possible it won't if the weather changes massively and we get really aggresive anti melt conditions but literally nothing it hinting at this right now, even just middling conditions for melt look like it will slaughter the 2012 record.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: 6roucho on May 10, 2016, 03:34:42 PM
I think it's the psychology of making open predictions, Siffy. People feel exposed by picking outliers, perhaps in part because outliers have been predicted before and not eventuated. The obvious concern shown on threads here that the ice is on the verge of an abrupt decline doesn't aooear to be reflected in the votes. Count me in the category. I thunk it but I didn't vote it.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: DoomInTheUK on May 10, 2016, 03:37:36 PM
If my fading memory serves, back in the good old days, ice would spend 5-7 years in the Beaufort Gyre before either heading out of the Fram or piling up along the CAA coast. Now it's down to 1-3 years and much more either melts out or goes through the Fram. The loses along the CAA aren't being replaced and the old thick MYI is being torn apart.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Tealight on May 10, 2016, 04:37:17 PM
I chose a conservative 2.75 to 3.0 million km2. Currently we are on course for a record low and with a storm in August I expect it to go as low as 2.0 million km2. If June/July turn out to be cold then it will just be close to the 2012 minimum.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: seaicesailor on May 10, 2016, 06:17:44 PM

I picked between 0.5 and 0.75.

[...]

I really don't understand all the posts which are acting like this will be a 'priming' year and won't breach the 2012 record. I mean yea it's totally possible it won't if the weather changes massively and we get really aggresive anti melt conditions but literally nothing it hinting at this right now, even just middling conditions for melt look like it will slaughter the 2012 record.

I think it's the psychology of making open predictions, Siffy. People feel exposed by picking outliers, perhaps in part because outliers have been predicted before and not eventuated. The obvious concern shown on threads here that the ice is on the verge of an abrupt decline doesn't aooear to be reflected in the votes. Count me in the category. I thunk it but I didn't vote it.

L.O.L.

@6roucho So you affirm that people feel exposed by picking outliers . . . when more than half of the people are voting at or below 2012, which is the mother-of-all-outliers?

@Siffy You may not understand some posts but I don't understand some others. East Siberia has snow depth anomalies above 0.5 meters in large extents of flat lands adjacent to the ESS coast, see map here
https://www.ccin.ca/home/ccw/snow/current (https://www.ccin.ca/home/ccw/snow/current)
I expect snow depths over the ice may be similar in a region where PIOMAS estimates and CRYOSAT-2 observations indicate +2m and +3m ice. Then North Greenland coast has +3m and +4m ice with similar snow depth according to TOPAZ. A lot of ice and a lot of snow.
It is going to take a lot of heat to end with less than 1Mkm2, but everything is possible.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: DoomInTheUK on May 10, 2016, 06:34:44 PM
@seaicesailor - I suppose the question is: Is 3+M ice with snow on a different beast when it's being broken up and pushed around than when it's sat quietly being an insulating layer. My gut feeling is that waves might turn out to play a big part in the melt this year.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Siffy on May 10, 2016, 07:05:40 PM
My apologies if my earlier post came across as insulting.  :-\

It is going to take a lot of heat to end with less than 1Mkm2, but everything is possible.

Isn't that heat energy available every year? The incoming insolation is certainly capable of melting all that ice, it just needs to actually get absorbed instead of bounced back out into space. That's part of what makes this year so different, with places like the Beaufort sea being so exposed that's large amounts of energy getting taken in instead of being bounced out.

The current GFS forecast is projecting that much of the snow cover in the Ice around and near the Beaufort is going to get melted as well allowing even more of that energy to stay in the local energy system.

Apologies for the large image below but here's what GFS thinks will happen to the snow cover and it looks rather dramatic to me.
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FmGQwRrq.gif&hash=8fb5fd2a7552702228e89085f63f0ca5)
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: OSweetMrMath on May 10, 2016, 07:49:28 PM
I really don't understand all the posts which are acting like this will be a 'priming' year and won't breach the 2012 record. I mean yea it's totally possible it won't if the weather changes massively and we get really aggresive anti melt conditions but literally nothing it hinting at this right now, even just middling conditions for melt look like it will slaughter the 2012 record.

There aren't all that many posts or votes arguing against a new record. At this moment, 77 out of 99 total votes are for 3.25 or less, nearly at the record or below.

I'm one of the few not predicting a record. My reasoning is, first, I've predicted records before and been wrong, so I'm reluctant to predict records again. Second, contrary to your assessment that middling conditions will break the record, I believe that setting a record requires extraordinary conditions. We've had record setting conditions so far, but I'm not willing to predict that these conditions will continue all the way through the summer.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: magnamentis on May 10, 2016, 08:11:36 PM
i thought i'll be the outlier but as it seems we ( the Between 2.75 and 3.0 million km2 voters ) are going to overtake LOL

each day that passes by while keeping the distance to 2012 values makes a new record more probable and if the entire CAB ice will start to rotate and eventually drift southward we're in, which is somehow what i expect, that a huge junk will disconnect from the landfast ice and drift to one of the edges that are more insolated even in late august than 85-90 north. pure speculation maybe but a thought that i will keep an eye on.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: seaicesailor on May 10, 2016, 10:24:20 PM
My apologies if my earlier post came across as insulting.  :-\

It is going to take a lot of heat to end with less than 1Mkm2, but everything is possible.

Isn't that heat energy available every year? The incoming insolation is certainly capable of melting all that ice, it just needs to actually get absorbed instead of bounced back out into space. That's part of what makes this year so different, with places like the Beaufort sea being so exposed that's large amounts of energy getting taken in instead of being bounced out.

The current GFS forecast is projecting that much of the snow cover in the Ice around and near the Beaufort is going to get melted as well allowing even more of that energy to stay in the local energy system.

Apologies for the large image below but here's what GFS thinks will happen to the snow cover and it looks rather dramatic to me.

I for one did not feel insulted :) nor by 6roucho comments obviously (hope you guys don't take my way of expressing as insulting, it is not!). I respect your prediction but see very difficult to happen.

The map you posted shows widespread surface melting for Pacific side, melt ponds will start to appear, etc. melting at full throttle never said worse. In the last frame the limit of surface melting defines very well the beginning of the ice that I believe is either old or thick or both, ridged, and covered with thicker snow. Hence my (initial) guess that this year will be close to 2012 but not so sure it will beat it. It is all pure speculation at this point.
What would make a huge difference (apart form this extraordinary beginning of season) is a continuation of Fram export during Summer (it practically ceases in Summer), which I have never observed, but I have read it happened in 2007. If such thing happens, then 2016 or especially 2017 could become really dramatic.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: AbruptSLR on May 10, 2016, 10:26:59 PM
Obviously, we cannot ignore the importance of ice export out of the Fram (see attached image & linked reference):

Smedsrud et al (2016), "Fram Strait sea ice export variability and September Arctic sea ice extent over the last 80 years", The Cryosphere Discuss., doi:10.5194/tc-2016-79

http://www.the-cryosphere-discuss.net/tc-2016-79/tc-2016-79.pdf (http://www.the-cryosphere-discuss.net/tc-2016-79/tc-2016-79.pdf)

Extract: "The Arctic Basin exports between 600,000 and 1 million km² of it’s sea ice cover southwards through Fram Strait each year, or about 10 % of the sea-ice covered area inside the basin."
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: theoldinsane on May 10, 2016, 11:22:17 PM
The GAC in 2012 was a perfect storm with a perfect timing. The ice has degraded further since 2012 so the "only" thing needed this year is a perfect storm with a not so perfect timing (july or maybe september) or a not so perfect storm but with a perfect timing (august).

And the possibility for a storm increases for every year passing because of the increased heat in the system.

This are two reasons that make a vicious circle IMO. Maybe the ice do not disappear 2016 if no storm occurs, but it will happen in the not so distant future. Say before 2020.

my 2 cents

My choice is 2.75-3.00

Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: misanthroptimist on May 10, 2016, 11:37:09 PM
My guess is between 2.75 and 3.0 Mkm2. It's based on the huge head start we have on previous years, low snow cover, and some of the other factors covered above by others. As always, though, weather is the big player. I have no idea what the weather will be
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Richard Rathbone on May 10, 2016, 11:46:57 PM
5+ has to be the one to go for.

May needs to be relatively hot for melting momentum to run through into the Central Arctic, and so far its looking to be average by 1980-2015 standards. No early melt ponds means lots of ice left at the end of the year. With the 4 bins for the price of 1 offer at the top end, 5+ has to be the best bet.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: AbruptSLR on May 11, 2016, 12:00:26 AM
5+ has to be the one to go for.

May needs to be relatively hot for melting momentum to run through into the Central Arctic, and so far its looking to be average by 1980-2015 standards. No early melt ponds means lots of ice left at the end of the year. With the 4 bins for the price of 1 offer at the top end, 5+ has to be the best bet.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: DoomInTheUK on May 11, 2016, 12:09:18 AM
The actual value of the vote matters very little. I find the reasoning behind the guess as far more interesting.

It feels like we have passed a tipping point where the consensus has switched from event a/b/c could be bad for the ice to one where often events are highlighted that may slow the melt.

Nothing scientific, just my gut feeling having lurked around here for several years.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: magnamentis on May 11, 2016, 12:33:45 AM
@DoomInTheUK

yep, it's like a kind of brainstorming where everything is laid out in front of our "sensors" and one can observe the thinking patterns change, while the noobs like myself are racing and the specialists are flattening the waves  ;)
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: johnm33 on May 11, 2016, 10:49:50 AM
I think less than 4, lack of melt ponds could just mean a thin ice crust over snow, the ice is smashed far more at the mercy of the wind than I've ever seen it. Moving vast volumes of ice around will provoke unprecedented wave activity, the atmosphere is warmer than 'normal' the arriving Atlantic waters show up as anomalously warm, so apart from that chunk of ice shelf stuck on [?] bank and some thick multi-year ice everything could be smashed or melt out. So 1.75-2 is my pessimistic middle ground.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: DoomInTheUK on May 11, 2016, 12:01:27 PM
Moving vast volumes of ice around will provoke unprecedented wave activity.

Minor issue of clarity here. The ice in water will always dampen waves down. Only wind across water will generate the kind of waves we're interested in, and the longer the fetch, the bigger the waves.
It's probably just being pedantic, but it's the space between the floes that allow for the waves, and the leads opening so far won't allow for ice killing waves. The large open spaces where ice has melted out however.....
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: johnm33 on May 11, 2016, 01:07:53 PM
"minor issue" Ok, with the leads we have the winds gain more purchase, the ice is fairly young and eminently crushable that gives it a higher profile, > more purchase more leads, less new ice formed as the season runs. Given sufficient space/enough leads huge areas of ice will move around, water will move in to replace that volume, pound for pound, that will generate internal waves, how these interact with currents and or gravity/surface waves is anyones guess, mine is that a significant fraction will be bad for the ice. Given the persistence of winds so far this year, Waynes 'big blue' forecast, and the already present mobility of the ice I expect the surface waves this year to skirt the limits of previous extremes nor would I be surprised if those extremes were exceeded. Given the elevated salinity of deeper Arctic waters internal waves once generated will be particularly energetic, and with their immense size the ice will slide down either side of the crest thus generating more leads. We will see this happen, but perhaps not this year or the next few, but it's looking very possible.
Internal waves https://youtu.be/WYmRnSRsS7Y (https://youtu.be/WYmRnSRsS7Y)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7GXLJQ2Zn0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7GXLJQ2Zn0)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_wave (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_wave)
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Jim Pettit on May 11, 2016, 01:09:51 PM
I voted 3.5-3.75. IOW, not a record, but almost certainly second lowest, due in very large part to the huge difference between 1st place (3.12 M) and 2nd (4.07 M).

2012 had two very rapid melt periods:

1) The first was a one-week early June loss of a million km2--something never before seen in the satellite record. But after that, 2012's trajectory shallowed out a bit, and the lead it had built up virtually vanished over the ensuing weeks. Twas only the second rapid melt period that kicked things into high gear:

2) The early-August GAC, which saw yet *another* one-week decrease of about a million km, again something not seen before or since. And for those who say the GAC didn't have much effect, I'd remind you that as of the day the storm began--August 3rd--2012 and 2007 were separated by only 100k or so, with 2007 gaining. The GAC allowed 2012 extent to keep falling during the time of year when NH ice loss has historically begun slowing and bottoming out.

The point is, while 2016 *is* most definitely a special year, with several factors in place that haven't been before, that doesn't in any way mean a record minimum is imminent. In fact, by my own calculations, 2016 is statistically more likely to end up above 4 million than it is to finish below 3 million. So, again: 3.5-3.75. That's my guess for now...
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: 6roucho on May 11, 2016, 01:51:38 PM
I for one did not feel insulted :) nor by 6roucho comments obviously (hope you guys don't take my way of expressing as insulting, it is not!). I respect your prediction but see very difficult to happen.
You're always a civil and persuasive arguer, seaicesailor. I had a chuckle as well.

It's true: there are outliers, and there are OUTLIERS.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: jdallen on May 11, 2016, 07:17:34 PM
<snippage>
The point is, while 2016 *is* most definitely a special year, with several factors in place that haven't been before, that doesn't in any way mean a record minimum is imminent. In fact, by my own calculations, 2016 is statistically more likely to end up above 4 million than it is to finish below 3 million. So, again: 3.5-3.75. That's my guess for now...
Concur Jim, and your guestimate actually does follow the statistical record. If conditions follow the average of the last 10 years or so, we will end up in a near statistical tie with 2007/2011/2015.  I am stepping out on a limb a little with mine (2.75-3.0), but I'm betting on the weather to be more 2012-like than 2015-like.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: DungeonMaster on May 11, 2016, 07:26:51 PM
Gentlemen and Ladies,


you can now change your mind and edit your vote.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Juan C. García on May 11, 2016, 08:05:58 PM
Gentlemen and Ladies,


you can now change your mind and edit your vote.

Great and thanks, DungeonMaster!

I moved my vote from 3.0-3.25 to the 3.25-3.5 million km2.
Just want to be a little more conservative!
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: werther on May 11, 2016, 08:46:49 PM
"The point is, while 2016 *is* most definitely a special year, with several factors in place that haven't been before, that doesn't in any way mean a record minimum is imminent.

That line by Jim Pettit comes close to my own opinion. While the initial set-up for this season is exciting, extrapolating from here to the minimum has a high Las Vegas-aspect. There's a big difference between the large scale trend (which is awful) and the small time-frame to combine several parameters into the Dragon King-event. Just 16 weeks, guys.

Anything can happen, but don't get bored when drama doesn't fulfill our expectations. Keep an eye on the science and the beauty.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Oyvind Johnsen on May 11, 2016, 08:49:59 PM
The last few Seasons have showed clearly that melting is very weather dependent, through the season. And the weather is, more than a week or so into the future, not predictable. So, there is still a very wide range of possible outcomes for the minimum in September, and also a quite wide range of likely outcomes.
To pick a bin, then, must include some pure guesswork.
In my guessing, I agree with the arguments of Jim Pettit. I went for the slightly more conservative 3.75 - 4.0.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: 6roucho on May 12, 2016, 06:22:31 AM
...L.O.L.

@6roucho So you affirm that people feel exposed by picking outliers . . . when more than half of the people are voting at or below 2012, which is the mother-of-all-outliers?

Seaicesailor, I replied to this glibly before but it deserves a more considered response!

I suggest we're dealing with two kinds of outlier: outliers in the set of possible outcomes, based on a reasonable analysis of trends, and outliers in the set of predictions of outcomes, based on opinions about discontinuities. An outlier in the first set is 2012. An outlier in the second set is an ice-free Arctic.

The transition to an ice-free Arctic (and of course, the 'transition' to < 1m sq km is only a step on that path) is a new event to us, and we're not good at predicting the timing of possible discontinuities in new events. Indeed we're not good at predicting the timing of discontinuities we've seen before!

But, we're somewhat better at identifying the kinds of systems that exhibit such discontinuities. One important property is interconnectedness. Interconnected systems can often be stable, until some  trigger event causes them to all move at once, and then they can collapse into chaos.

To my untrained eye, as a theoretician with no knowledge of sea ice physics beyond what I read on here, the Arctic sea ice looks like such an interconnected system.

Thus, I expect to see a discontinuity, but can't predict when. However I can see multiple attractors moving at once. Temperature has been rising blindingly fast in climate terms, and now we have concerns (that might be unfounded) about the structural integrity of the ice pack itself.

The mother of all black swan events would be a substantial part of it simply flowing out the Fram. I see no reason in physics why this, or else some other rapid change, can't happen any time. It might only require a combination of current conditions and weather.

So, I shilly-shallied round by predicting a new record low. What I should've done is either predict an ice-free state, to demonstrate my opinion, as Peter Wadhams has effectively done, or made a prediction based on a reasonable analysis of trends, as you did.

Of course there's no 'reason' why a rapid decline should happen this year, or any year soon, or at all. At least none we can compute. We could still be watching the Arctic approaching an ice-free state, from our retirement villages on the beach in what used to be sunlit uplands, in 2046.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: abbottisgone on May 12, 2016, 07:13:51 AM
...L.O.L.

@6roucho So you affirm that people feel exposed by picking outliers . . . when more than half of the people are voting at or below 2012, which is the mother-of-all-outliers?

Seaicesailor, I replied to this glibly before but it deserves a more considered response!

I suggest we're dealing with two kinds of outlier: outliers in the set of possible outcomes, based on a reasonable analysis of trends, and outliers in the set of predictions of outcomes, based on opinions about discontinuities. An outlier in the first set is 2012. An outlier in the second set is an ice-free Arctic.

The transition to an ice-free Arctic (and of course, the 'transition' to < 1m sq km is only a step on that path) is a new event to us, and we're not good at predicting the timing of possible discontinuities in new events. Indeed we're not good at predicting the timing of discontinuities we've seen before!

But, we're somewhat better at identifying the kinds of systems that exhibit such discontinuities. One important property is interconnectedness. Interconnected systems can often be stable, until some  trigger event causes them to all move at once, and then they can collapse into chaos.

To my untrained eye, as a theoretician with no knowledge of sea ice physics beyond what I read on here, the Arctic sea ice looks like such an interconnected system.

Thus, I expect to see a discontinuity, but can't predict when. However I can see multiple attractors moving at once. Temperature has been rising blindingly fast in climate terms, and now we have concerns (that might be unfounded) about the structural integrity of the ice pack itself.

The mother of all black swan events would be a substantial part of it simply flowing out the Fram. I see no reason in physics why this, or else some other rapid change, can't happen any time. It might only require a combination of current conditions and weather.

So, I shilly-shallied round by predicting a new record low. What I should've done is either predict an ice-free state, to demonstrate my opinion, as Peter Wadhams has effectively done, or made a prediction based on a reasonable analysis of trends, as you did.

Of course there's no 'reason' why a rapid decline should happen this year, or any year soon, or at all. At least none we can compute. We could still be watching the Arctic approaching an ice-free state, from our retirement villages on the beach in what used to be sunlit uplands, in 2046.
Cool.

(lol)

I would like to seek out the answers as to what prevents ice being exported through the fram straight, as a general rule, personally... then we/I can look at this issue of multi-year sea ice disappearing affecting the whole packs 'structural integrity'.

I might google this 'interconnectedness' term. Sounds pretty cool....
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: 6roucho on May 12, 2016, 07:50:31 AM
I might google this 'interconnectedness' term. Sounds pretty cool....
You will have to filter out a lot of junk: the term has been picked up by the new age community. Here's an introduction from a non-climate field, but with concepts applicable to climate: http://www.eifr.eu/files/Slides_Steve_OHANA_28032011.pdf (http://www.eifr.eu/files/Slides_Steve_OHANA_28032011.pdf)
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Juan C. García on May 12, 2016, 08:03:19 AM
...
2012 had two very rapid melt periods:

1) The first was a one-week early June loss of a million km2--something never before seen in the satellite record. But after that, 2012's trajectory shallowed out a bit, and the lead it had built up virtually vanished over the ensuing weeks. ...

Interesting that we are right now 1.05 million km2 below 2012, so if 2016 matches the drop of 2012 to early june, we can stay one week without decreasing the extent and we will match 2012 at the end.  :o
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: abbottisgone on May 12, 2016, 08:10:47 AM
I might google this 'interconnectedness' term. Sounds pretty cool....
You will have to filter out a lot of junk: the term has been picked up by the new age community. Here's an introduction from a non-climate field, but with concepts applicable to climate: http://www.eifr.eu/files/Slides_Steve_OHANA_28032011.pdf (http://www.eifr.eu/files/Slides_Steve_OHANA_28032011.pdf)
Cheers, because it is one of those words!

 8)
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: 6roucho on May 12, 2016, 08:43:45 AM
I might google this 'interconnectedness' term. Sounds pretty cool....
You will have to filter out a lot of junk: the term has been picked up by the new age community. Here's an introduction from a non-climate field, but with concepts applicable to climate: http://www.eifr.eu/files/Slides_Steve_OHANA_28032011.pdf (http://www.eifr.eu/files/Slides_Steve_OHANA_28032011.pdf)
Cheers, because it is one of those words!

 8)
The new age movement has adopted chaos theory, quantum mechanics and Jungian psychology as their pet scientific fields. http://sebpearce.com/bullshit/ (http://sebpearce.com/bullshit/)
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: abbottisgone on May 12, 2016, 09:01:17 AM
The votes seem to indicate people expect 3.00 or thereabouts.

If it gets anywhere near that I would expect the markets to react.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: DoomInTheUK on May 12, 2016, 12:08:59 PM
The votes seem to indicate people expect 3.00 or thereabouts.

If it gets anywhere near that I would expect the markets to react.

I think you expect too much. We might get a little excited, but for everyone else, nope. The markets will steadfastly ignore it. Even if it was made out to be bigger news, the markets wouldn't know how to incorporate it. At the worst, they'll see it as presenting 'opportunities' and react positively.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: be cause on May 12, 2016, 01:10:43 PM
i had a dream last night in which the seas at the north pole were full of reporters reporting the absence of sea ice within 200 miles ! Only such a reality will wake up the media never mind the public and the politicians :) .
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: LRC1962 on May 12, 2016, 01:12:03 PM
Voted 2.0-2.25, but then I have been seeing doom for years that have fortunately not come to past yet.
My reasons:
Normally, temps give little indication as to actual ice conditions(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcires1.colorado.edu%2F%7Easlater%2FARCTIC_TAIR%2FIMG%2Farctic_925mb_dfa_2016.gif&hash=7c153b2ee3ce2e74d56d2cdfa7af5eb3)
this year has the anomaly in such new territory there must be some kind of impact.
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fweather.unisys.com%2Fsurface%2Fsst_anom.gif&hash=5cf96dd416f2f3ac4f0a798ded10dcf4)
Normally an El Nino year creates very cold north Pacific, but that Warm blob still is on the warm side, In the North Atlantic that cold blob is getting larger, messing up the Gulf Stream big time and the temps variances between that and the Caribbean and east coast US is so large that it will create and dominate its own weather systems for a long time. Between these two I can see a lot of warm very wet storms making their way into the Arctic. These blobs are together bigger then they ever have in the past.
In the past years what happens in the Arctic stays in the Arctic as far as direct weather/sun light influences is concerned has been for the most part held true. I believe this year will see the continuation of this past winter in that the major impacts will not be how much sun/cloud, but how many and what kind of systems get pumped into the Arctic.
Finally what has saved the ice the past two years is how strong the land fast ice has held up and how little export through the Fram has occurred. Starting in January the opposite has been happening and I do not see that coming to an end any time very soon.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: jdallen on May 12, 2016, 06:22:34 PM
Voted 2.0-2.25, but then I have been seeing doom for years that have fortunately not come to past yet.
My reasons:
Normally, temps give little indication as to actual ice conditions... <snippage>
Definitely - air temperature provides little of the heat required to force melt. 

However, to borrow a military maxim, quantity has it's own quality.  The additional heat is like losing a counterweight on a tire.  Early on in accelerating, it isn't particularly noticeable. However, increasing speed cause it to introduce forces that can run your vehicle off the road.

This year the heat has absolutely thrown off the balance.  All that remains to be determined is just how much acceleration the weather applies.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: seaicesailor on May 12, 2016, 06:29:20 PM
...L.O.L.

@6roucho So you affirm that people feel exposed by picking outliers . . . when more than half of the people are voting at or below 2012, which is the mother-of-all-outliers?

I suggest we're dealing with two kinds of outlier: outliers in the set of possible outcomes, based on a reasonable analysis of trends, and outliers in the set of predictions of outcomes, based on opinions about discontinuities. An outlier in the first set is 2012. An outlier in the second set is an ice-free Arctic.

I agree with you, 2012 is not a freak out of nothing. It is a first blow of what will become usual soon. It is not an anomaly or an outlier in that sense. I was a bit extreme to highlight that many people are voting below a mark that is already very exceptional. :- |

Quote

The mother of all black swan events would be a substantial part of it simply flowing out the Fram. I see no reason in physics why this, or else some other rapid change, can't happen any time. It might only require a combination of current conditions and weather.


Apart from this extraordinary beginning of melting season, Fram Strait export (and Barentz export too) slows down from May to Sep. I bring two figures from this paper, page 4230:

http://www.the-cryosphere-discuss.net/9/4205/2015/tcd-9-4205-2015-print.pdf (http://www.the-cryosphere-discuss.net/9/4205/2015/tcd-9-4205-2015-print.pdf)

The second figure shows that between March and September there is export of 200 k km2 to 500 k Km2 out of the +1 M km2 for the whole year. 2007 was the worst during May-September IIRC from what I read, but maybe I am wrong.

I see a lot of tough ice in CAB-ESS, but a continuation of current conditions and a bad year of export (500 k Km2 or worse) could put Sep extent below 2012. Also because Fram export may have been caused by sustained Arctic dipole conditions, which is bad in general.
Or what could come on 2017 onward if export continues high throughout the year.

However I may be biased to conservative, because I have been observing Arctic ice after 2012 shock, and have seen more good news for ice than usually announced in this Forum.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: abbottisgone on May 13, 2016, 03:27:55 AM
The votes seem to indicate people expect 3.00 or thereabouts.

If it gets anywhere near that I would expect the markets to react.

I think you expect too much. We might get a little excited, but for everyone else, nope. The markets will steadfastly ignore it. Even if it was made out to be bigger news, the markets wouldn't know how to incorporate it. At the worst, they'll see it as presenting 'opportunities' and react positively.
Markets are democratic: ideas prevail and if opportunities present to embrace change then it stands to profitable reason, for the entrepreneurial set, that they will.

The only reason they haven't thus far( ..yet Tesla and formula-e do actually exist!) is because it's costly to change plant and embrace new strategical horizons as this encumbers many many years of uncertainty and investment.

It's all tipping points!

Divestment is investment...phase change and inter-connectedness  ;D

Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Juan C. García on May 18, 2016, 06:01:54 PM
This is the forecast, if we take IJIS yesterday value and the drop is the average of 2007, 2011 and 2015. I choose these years because they are the worst, taking out 2012. So, in this forecast I don't expect a GAC, but I expect that 2016 will perform like the second to fourth worst years.

Thanks everybody for their participation. The poll ends in 14 hours, so it is time to decide the vote (for those that haven't vote) or change it (for those who voted).

Thanks for your participation!
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: epiphyte on May 18, 2016, 06:38:12 PM
I ended up going for 2.5-2.25, on the hunch that even on this trajectory, some of the peripheral + CAA MYI will hold out. If I thought that enough moisture might show up and the temps get low enough to boost the snow cover over the next couple of weeks, I'd guess higher - somewhere between 2011 & 2012.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: bbr2314 on May 18, 2016, 07:40:38 PM
I think the logic for 'take a blend of X years and assume no GAC' is very flawed.

What if a GAC is actually normal after the sea ice declines below X point serving as another feedback for additional loss?

That could mean that 2016 will experience a GAC (or multiple) *worse* than 2012 at an earlier date.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Tor Bejnar on May 18, 2016, 08:04:53 PM
As of today, Jim Pettit's graphs (https://sites.google.com/site/pettitclimategraphs/pettit-climate-graphs) projecting all years subsequent-to-today surface melt amounts (area and extent) on the current 2016 value have only 2012 losses setting new records, and for volume, only two years' melts would set a new record.  Because of the head start 2016 has on others, I lean toward believing we may have a 2012-like future melt experience.  Therefore I expect a record low September SIE area, but just barely, and voted for 2.75-3.0.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: TerryM on May 18, 2016, 08:16:48 PM
bbr


I know that the swells felt far into the ice pack were new to the crew of Polarstern in 2012. I believe that arctic rainfall was very unusual pre 2007, and if cyclonic weather is indeed a feature of low ice conditions, we could be in for a very precipitous drop in the very near future.


'Twould be nice if just once something new appeared that would favor ice retention.


Terry
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Juan C. García on May 18, 2016, 08:17:42 PM
I think the logic for 'take a blend of X years and assume no GAC' is very flawed.

What if a GAC is actually normal after the sea ice declines below X point serving as another feedback for additional loss?

That could mean that 2016 will experience a GAC (or multiple) *worse* than 2012 at an earlier date.

I agree. I just decided to be conservative, but I am concerned that we can have a GAC and in fact, I am concerned that GAC's could be a new normal in the near future.
Hope not!
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: anthropocene on May 18, 2016, 08:26:34 PM
Between 3.25 and 3.5.  2012 won't be beaten unless there is an exceptional increase in heat in the high arctic or there is a GAC. Quite possible that 2012 will be beaten but the greatest likelihood is that it won't be.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: slow wing on May 18, 2016, 10:45:12 PM
Between 2.0 and 2.25 million km2.

This year's melt is weeks ahead of previous years.

The Beaufort Sea in particular is all cut up & with a lot of ice already gone near the coast.

On the Atlantic side, the ice North of Svalbard keeps getting chewed up and it was like that through much of the winter. So there seems to be more than average heat flux coming in through that ocean current.

The Russian side is worse than usual. Their big rivers are discharging their melt water earlier than usual. The tundra is heating up and there is evidence of soot from their massive wildfires landing on the Arctic sea ice. That will help warm up the ice under the summer sun.

Snow cover is worse than usual and the land around the Arctic Basin will be heating up more than usual. We're in the second year of a big El Nino event and global monthly temperatures are easily breaking their previous records. Some of that should feed down into the Arctic.

So I'm guessing a new record low and all that will remain at the end of the melt season will be some of the multi-year ice off the Canadian Arctic Coast.

Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: oren on May 18, 2016, 11:43:17 PM
Moved my vote one notch down to 3.00-3.25, seeing that the extent chart is unrelenting. 50-50 chance of passing 2012.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Pmt111500 on May 19, 2016, 03:25:25 AM
Still assuming the marine response to El Nino in the Arctic is much delayed so keeping my vote fairly high.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Juan C. García on May 19, 2016, 06:50:39 AM
Neven & Wipneus: I'm waiting for your comment & vote!!!  ;D
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: abbottisgone on May 19, 2016, 07:45:10 AM
Moved my vote one notch down to 3.00-3.25, seeing that the extent chart is unrelenting. 50-50 chance of passing 2012.
Was that before or after you realised the May 18th figure only went down 40k?

 ???
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: abbottisgone on May 19, 2016, 07:46:07 AM
Neven & Wipneus: I'm waiting for your comment & vote!!!  ;D
..me too!  ;D
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Wipneus on May 19, 2016, 08:29:18 AM
Neven & Wipneus: I'm waiting for your comment & vote!!!  ;D

Second place, about 3.5-3.75.
There is too much remaining ice, not in melt and supposedly quite thick. I may change my mind if the microwave sensors are starting to see substantial melting real soon now.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: abbottisgone on May 19, 2016, 08:34:21 AM
Still assuming the marine response to El Nino in the Arctic is much delayed so keeping my vote fairly high.
Interesting!
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: LRC1962 on May 19, 2016, 09:19:20 AM
bbr


I know that the swells felt far into the ice pack were new to the crew of Polarstern in 2012. I believe that arctic rainfall was very unusual pre 2007, and if cyclonic weather is indeed a feature of low ice conditions, we could be in for a very precipitous drop in the very near future.


'Twould be nice if just once something new appeared that would favor ice retention.


Terry
I suspect 2013,2014 is going to be the best examples you will get under present circumstances.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: DavidR on May 19, 2016, 10:42:12 AM
Final count is in and our collective estimate is approx 2.67 M km^2, 500 K km^2 less than 2012.

More than 70% thought the record would be broken, compared to  20% in the first poll last year.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Juan C. García on May 19, 2016, 06:29:47 PM
Interesting the comparition that DavidR does between this 2016 poll and the 2015 poll.
I make several groups with this poll:

                                    Votes          %
      
Above 2007                         1      0.7%
Even with 2007                    5      3.6%
Between 2007 and 2012      24    17.4%
Even with 2012                   18    13.0%
From 2.0 to 3.0 mkm2         65    47.1%
From 1.0 to 2.0 mkm2         22    15.9%
From 0.0 to 1.0 mkm2          3      2.2%
      
Total                                138   100.0%


I was expecting less votes. Participation was great, so thank you all!
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: anotheramethyst on May 19, 2016, 07:37:57 PM
Thank you, Juan, for making the poll.  I really appreciate it :)
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: theoldinsane on May 20, 2016, 12:44:59 AM
I thought I would end up in the alarmist camp but I ended in the mainstrem camp (2.75-3.0).

OTOH, recently I talked to a friend who believed the Arctic ocean was covered with about 1000 m thick ice. And he is a very clever guy in many other fields, but I think this is the alarming issue. Outside this forum, how many know that the thickness of most of the ice in the Arctic Ice is about 2 m right now (or less)?   
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Neven on May 20, 2016, 11:13:08 AM
Neven & Wipneus: I'm waiting for your comment & vote!!!  ;D

Thanks for starting this poll, Juan (and thanks for voting everyone!). If you could do the same thing in the next 3 months, that'd be great. Make sure you do the exact same thing, so that it's easy to compare changes over time. I'll be sure to advertise it on the ASIB.

I've refrained from voting just yet, because I want to see how Melt Pond May plays out.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: abbottisgone on May 21, 2016, 04:38:48 PM
Neven & Wipneus: I'm waiting for your comment & vote!!!  ;D

Thanks for starting this poll, Juan (and thanks for voting everyone!). If you could do the same thing in the next 3 months, that'd be great. Make sure you do the exact same thing, so that it's easy to compare changes over time. I'll be sure to advertise it on the ASIB.

I've refrained from voting just yet, because I want to see how Melt Pond May plays out.
I think you just made me panic  ??? .....  :o :o :o
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Neven on May 21, 2016, 05:10:41 PM
I think you just made me panic  ??? .....  :o :o :o

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-OG9Aj6UnToE/V0B6Tv7_ZXI/AAAAAAAAC6g/Y8QdsOQimlM_KwSYPiWtAf0H28vulKobQCCo/s371/kcavlw.jpg)
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: abbottisgone on May 21, 2016, 05:25:41 PM
I think you just made me panic  ??? .....  :o :o :o

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-OG9Aj6UnToE/V0B6Tv7_ZXI/AAAAAAAAC6g/Y8QdsOQimlM_KwSYPiWtAf0H28vulKobQCCo/s371/kcavlw.jpg)
I voted 4 to 4.25 and commented that I chose to retain that oh so precious mustard seed... I might just refrain from looking for a few days actually.

Government departments around the world are having serious discussions around the water cooler these days I hear ... People are even bothering to write to their member of parliament!

... Members of parliament even bother to stop and listen to your concerns if you see them in the street!

... I am officially choosing to enjoy every last second!
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Juan C. García on May 22, 2016, 04:21:34 AM
Thanks for starting this poll, Juan (and thanks for voting everyone!). If you could do the same thing in the next 3 months, that'd be great. Make sure you do the exact same thing, so that it's easy to compare changes over time. I'll be sure to advertise it on the ASIB.

Thanks for your comment Neven! I am looking forward to start the poll the next 3 months. I think I will start the next one around June 5th, that is in the middle of the beginning of the month and June 9th. (I opened this poll on May 9th).

[Edit: I am going to be a little off-topic now, but it is the end of this poll]

I don't want to jump the gun here, it's up to Neven, but can we start the polls on the minimum soon?  I know we have limited sources of data this year unfortunately.

I am concern about the comment that the Forum has limited sources of data, so I not sure to congratulate everyone that the Forum is reaching 1 million monthly views on average this year!
I am planning to relate the subject of Arctic Sea Ice lost and the activity on this Forum with other subjects in Mexico, that are: The chaotic urban growth of Mexico City, the reaction of local pollution against what should be a reaction to AGW and a possible solution to Mexico City traffic.
So I was thinking that you will have an increase in at least page views comming from Mexico (hopefully some donations as well, but I cannot assure it). I hope that it is ok that I mentioned this Forum as much as possible.
Anyway, the subject will be discussed closed to Santa Fe, one of the richest neighbourhoods of Mexico City and a good example of the chaotic urban growth.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: abbottisgone on May 22, 2016, 08:07:16 AM
You opened this poll on may 9th?

.. How come I've aged 50 years in less than 2 weeks??  :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Neven on May 22, 2016, 01:40:02 PM
I hope that it is ok that I mentioned this Forum as much as possible.

This goes without saying, Juan.  Thanks for spreading the word.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Juan C. García on May 22, 2016, 06:17:45 PM
I hope that it is ok that I mentioned this Forum as much as possible.

This goes without saying, Juan.  Thanks for spreading the word.

Your welcome, Neven. I admire the work on this Forum, so it is easy, at least on this part, to spread the word!
I am more concerned about other subjects, some of them involve with corruption or scientists that are not telling the true. So, I will open some topics on Policy and Solutions, like the ones talking about chaotic growth of Mexico City or my signature on this Forum. Some coments will be hard to swallow, but it is worst to continue without solutions.
Have all reader a great day!
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: anotheramethyst on May 23, 2016, 05:06:36 AM


I don't want to jump the gun here, it's up to Neven, but can we start the polls on the minimum soon?  I know we have limited sources of data this year unfortunately.

I am concern about the comment that the Forum has limited sources of data, so I not sure to congratulate everyone that the Forum is reaching 1 million monthly views on average this year!

Whoops, sorry for the confusion!!!! The forum is a wealth of data, that's not what I meant.  I was talking about the limited satellite data about the arctic because of the satellite failure.  I thought last year we did an IJIS extent and a CT area poll, so I wasn't sure what polls we can do this year.  I LOVE the forum, it's full of information :)
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: abbottisgone on May 23, 2016, 05:15:20 AM
I hope that it is ok that I mentioned this Forum as much as possible.

This goes without saying, Juan.  Thanks for spreading the word.

Your welcome, Neven. I admire the work on this Forum, so it is easy, at least on this part, to spread the word!
I am more concerned about other subjects, some of them involve with corruption or scientists that are not telling the true. So, I will open some topics on Policy and Solutions, like the ones talking about chaotic growth of Mexico City or my signature on this Forum. Some coments will be hard to swallow, but it is worst to continue without solutions.
Have all reader a great day!
Are you from Mexico, mate?

"Chido Hombre!  ;) ;)"
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: Neven on May 23, 2016, 08:12:01 AM
Whoops, sorry for the confusion!!!! The forum is a wealth of data, that's not what I meant.  I was talking about the limited satellite data about the arctic because of the satellite failure.  I thought last year we did an IJIS extent and a CT area poll, so I wasn't sure what polls we can do this year.  I LOVE the forum, it's full of information :)

Last year and the year before that we had polls for CT daily SIA and NSIDC monthly SIE. If data is not off by too much, there will probably be a NSIDC monthly SIE poll starting next month, as this is what is used for the SIPN SIO, etc.
Title: Re: ADS-JAXA 2016 Arctic SIE September minimum: May poll
Post by: abbottisgone on May 24, 2016, 10:18:03 AM
This isn't particularly scientific, but I took today's JAXA sea ice extent graph and simply cut/pasted the 2000's average trajectory on to the end of the 2016 line.  Essentially, I just cut off the plots after today's date and moved them down.  As it happens, the 2000's average and 2012 figure almost coincide for today's date.  This is convenient because it shows two different possible trajectories from today.

I drew a box across to the axis to indicate where the adjusted minima occur.  If the rest of 2016 follows the 2000's average trajectory, the minimum occurs at approximately 4.5 million km2.  If the rest of 2016 follows the 2012 trajectory, the minimum occurs at just over 2 million km2.

https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/vishop-extent.html?N (https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/vishop-extent.html?N)

FWIW, I maintain a graph that does all that work for you:

(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.prntscr.com%2Fimg%3Furl%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FUDYY4Nk.png&hash=19dc4b1521a95e0dd3b43a4afad31f0d)
Just googled and had a look at your graphs...

(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fiwantsomeproof.com%2Fextimg%2Fsiv_annual_max_loss_and_ice_remaining.png&hash=abd6be9e6aae50f91aecf6b77a2ce574)

...IS THIS THE SCARIEST ONE?