Neven might not be happy.
I hope the ire of the local gods is placated by such an outstanding way of starting the thread. Nice graph Ned W.Mea Culpa. I was thinking about the Extent & Area Data thread. If my memory is correct (?) the great Lord M Vader opened up this year's extent and data thread and it was blocked by Neven.
a great graph to start with indeed, finally something really new and worth to study a bit. thanks NedW
I hope the ire of the local gods is placated by such an outstanding way of starting the thread. Nice graph Ned W.
I was thinking of doing a review of 2018 of the contrast between events in each sea would be interesting.
Although it's not really hard to imagine the pack being 25% smaller as it was in 2012 (Ironically the same year sighted by the Mayans as the year of our awakening...), I think what BOE people fail to see is how hard it is for 'central ice' well away from the warmer coasts to get melted away. ESS took a lot of blow torches right off the coast and look how long it took to disappear... I'm not at all saying I don't agree with the downward trend but that--to me--hides the remaining ice being well away from the warmer lands. If you compare the current cap to the 80-2000's average, it really is like an open ocean Anyway... and seeing these extreme weather events already it is very dangerous to think we need to wait for a blue ocean before SHTF! We talked most of '18's spring of how Bearing remained open and we see every year how Laptev also seems to have an open crack so given this year's record melting in Laptev (the heart of most Clathrate studies if I'm not mistaken) I'm going to hazard a guess that this one area will be the next harbinger of things to come! The graphs are so off with recent dips in ESS etc. that one has to wonder if and when the warmth just gets enough of a foot hold to just up and collapse it!
Re BOE and the central ice, I think of it as some kind of negative feedback. The hardest ice to melt also has the earliest probable refreeze date. So a year like 2016, which made the deepest inroads into this arctic heartland, also has an early minimum which possibly prevented a new area record. While years like 2012 and this year had a late minimum but did not threaten this heartland.
I think the extra factor that will defeat this defense is strong ice movement. Should some kind of dipole settle on the Arctic and push the thick ice continuously to the Fram or the Atlantic front, coupled with the right weather and some kind of August GAC it could produce a BOE before the early refreeze strikes back.
The hardest ice to melt also has the earliest probable refreeze date.
Yes... EXPORT!!! ...and maybe a rain bomb will eventually take it out! Great point of the early refreeze...
There has been a rise of late as a storm has introduced milder air up from the Barents Sea/Atlantic
Slow wing’s most recent posted animation for the seven days ending 24 September appears to show a sizable flash refreeze in the ESS arm. Flash occurrences of that type, both melt and refreeze, are often seen differently by the sensors a day or so after the flash occurrence. If that happens in this instance, then another decline in extent could occur on that basis alone, though not likely enough to challenge the preliminary minimum, IMO.
JAXA SIE now almost 150K above the preliminary minimum. Looking at the animation slow wing just posted (CAA filling up, etc), I don't think it will go any lower, despite those crazy isobars in the coming 3-4 days.
Given the unprecedented event taking shape I cant believe this forum is dead.
We might see extent losses im early October.
I cant find anything like this in the archives.
I mean not even close.
Incredible.
The freeze up is going to crawl along.
Impressive. What's pumping it up?Given the unprecedented event taking shape I cant believe this forum is dead.
We might see extent losses im early October.
I cant find anything like this in the archives.
I mean not even close.
Yeah, the EPS mean even peaks above +3SD at tau 168, which is remarkable on an ensemble run at one week out.
Edit: The EC op run is at 4SD+ at 96hr and more or less keeps it there (or close) for a week. Nuts. That's a nuclear ridge.
What are 2 meter temperatures over the Chukchi?
Wondered since the atmosphere is warmer and thus ...more volume/height overall, doesn't that mean that even as we begin polar night with no sun on the surface, there is more 'air volume' still above the horizon being warmed by the sun. This is what comes to mind when I see the 500mb anomaly from Friv.
Honestly, freezing season is when the Arctic is exciting.
NSIDC Calls It: 2018 Arctic Sea Ice Minimum Extent Tied for Sixth Lowest on Record
https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2018/09/arctic-sea-ice-extent-arrives-at-its-minimum/
See also:
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2278.msg174445.html#msg174445
Is there any sort of DMI-like graphic that shows temps outside of 80-N? that NH winter temps are less of a diff. to the arctic than summer???
temps in the high Arctic continue to rise . Accordingly , today's dmi80 is over 8'C above average , again a record . Another way of looking at it .. temps are where they should have been 22 days ago .Worldview also shows catastrophic losses along the ATL front NE of Svalbard (near whatever those other islands I am not Googling at the moment are called). The retreat over the past few days has been dramatic but accelerated even more today.
Perspective .. the all time dmi80 record anomaly was last Feb .. @ 21'C b.c.
ps Worldview today shows the Siberian arm of ice beautifully ! :)
0z EURO says this thread is fake news and the melt season is far from over. DMI confirms imminent rapid Laptev retreat and very substantial front movement elsewhere as well.
Fake news!!!
I say, Neven, does that mean you don't think the Thames is going to freeze over ? And I was just about to ask NSIDC to add the North Sea and English Channel to their list of Arctic Seas.0z EURO says this thread is fake news and the melt season is far from over. DMI confirms imminent rapid Laptev retreat and very substantial front movement elsewhere as well.
Fake news!!!
Will you take this back and apologize if you turn out to be wrong?
JAXA had another 18K uptick and is now almost 250K above the prelim.
0z EURO says this thread is fake news and the melt season is far from over. DMI confirms imminent rapid Laptev retreat and very substantial front movement elsewhere as well.
Fake news!!!
(https://www.tropicaltidbits.com/analysis/models/ecmwf/2018092800/ecmwf_z500aNorm_nhem_8.png)
l-oh-l
(https://www.tropicaltidbits.com/analysis/models/ecmwf/2018092800/ecmwf_T850a_nhem_9.png)
Truly insane! But equally absurd are the anomalies flanking the NATL. I could also see both The Thames and The Hudson freezing synchronously for the first time since... the 1700s? But that probably pales in comparison to how far we would have to go back to get year-round ice-free Bering, which is seemingly plausible this year / next.
I could also see both The Thames and The Hudson freezing synchronously for the first time since... the 1700s?
0z EURO says this thread is fake news and the melt season is far from over. DMI confirms imminent rapid Laptev retreat and very substantial front movement elsewhere as well.
Fake news!!!
<snip>
0z EURO says this thread is fake news and the melt season is far from over. DMI confirms imminent rapid Laptev retreat and very substantial front movement elsewhere as well.
Fake news!!!
Will you take this back and apologize if you turn out to be wrong?
JAXA had another 18K uptick and is now almost 250K above the prelim.
Neven is probably going to be right. But I do think we could still see a decent decrease and indefinite stall in extent. The only real gains imminently will be across the CAA. In fact, the first new ice is now forming across Foxe Basin, which is expected to dip below freezing in its entirety by D10 according to the EURO.0z EURO says this thread is fake news and the melt season is far from over. DMI confirms imminent rapid Laptev retreat and very substantial front movement elsewhere as well.
Fake news!!!
Will you take this back and apologize if you turn out to be wrong?
JAXA had another 18K uptick and is now almost 250K above the prelim.
Yeah, getting back to minimum is going to be tough. We could very well see some drops (and probably will starting in 48-72 hr when the main push of WAA makes its way into the basin), but making up 300-400k is gonna be tough.
The bottom line is that this year is quickly going to retreat into last place. By how much is the question.
Interesting.
One can ask why the Pacific side has started to re-freeze even though temperatures are nowhere near as low as the -10 degrees C often stated here as the rule-of-thumb temperature when refreeze starts.I suspect that after the late melting in this region, the top layer is fresher and therefore more prone to early freezing and less conductive to full mixing of the water column when cooled from above.
I remember Jim Hunt stating a year or two ago when ice was forming at record pace that that was a bad thing because it didn't permit heat to escape from the arctic ocean as well as open water. Therefore, the slower refreeze we are seeing now, being the very opposite, should be a good thing later in the season because more open water means more escape of heat from the arctic ocean.
Is not that but one half of the equation?I remember Jim Hunt stating a year or two ago when ice was forming at record pace that that was a bad thing because it didn't permit heat to escape from the arctic ocean as well as open water. Therefore, the slower refreeze we are seeing now, being the very opposite, should be a good thing later in the season because more open water means more escape of heat from the arctic ocean.
Agreed, and the current weather is very favourable to compaction as well.
I like this!!!I remember Jim Hunt stating a year or two ago when ice was forming at record pace that that was a bad thing because it didn't permit heat to escape from the arctic ocean as well as open water. Therefore, the slower refreeze we are seeing now, being the very opposite, should be a good thing later in the season because more open water means more escape of heat from the arctic ocean.
Agreed, and the current weather is very favourable to compaction as well.
I remember Jim Hunt stating a year or two ago when ice was forming at record pace that that was a bad thing because it didn't permit heat to escape from the arctic ocean as well as open water. Therefore, the slower refreeze we are seeing now, being the very opposite, should be a good thing later in the season because more open water means more escape of heat from the arctic ocean.
I don't see this as some kind of welcome negative feedback, but simply as a consequence of having more heat in the system. Similar to the way a warming planet emits more heat to space thanks to black body radiation, this doesn't save us, but is rather a natural byproduct of the warming process.Yep, one has to carefully see what the heat balance is, and if the refreezing is being delayed by external input of heat (like today) or purely by heat release from a very bad season as 2007 and 2012.
I remember Jim Hunt stating a year or two ago when ice was forming at record pace that that was a bad thing because it didn't permit heat to escape from the arctic ocean as well as open water. Therefore, the slower refreeze we are seeing now, being the very opposite, should be a good thing later in the season because more open water means more escape of heat from the arctic ocean.
I remember Jim Hunt stating a year or two ago when ice was forming at record pace that that was a bad thing because it didn't permit heat to escape from the arctic ocean as well as open water. Therefore, the slower refreeze we are seeing now, being the very opposite, should be a good thing later in the season because more open water means more escape of heat from the arctic ocean.
Agreed, and the current weather is very favourable to compaction as well.
.... more open water means more escape of heat from the arctic ocean......... except in regions with strong downwellings, where slightly warmer solar heated waters(which used to be solar-reflective ice), instead of remaining at the surface, have been forced to deep waters, either on continental shelves or even into ocean depths, for long-term storage..... until future release from ocean circulation patterns into the atmosphere.
The late crazy weather is almost behind us now. I expect refreeze to pick up after tomorrow, with the ice edge expanding rapidly towards the Atlantic, etc.With the exception of the CAA (edit-and Greenland Sea), at the moment 'refreeze' is nearly all wind driven and the ice is very mobile. Pacific side compaction likely to continue. Atlantic side dispersion likely to reverse after a couple of days north of Svalbard.
The late crazy weather is almost behind us now.
The CAB chart is crazy. But I believe it will hit the physical limit soon.
Barrow is at -2C this morning under hours of clear skies. Barter Island at -1C. Not going to get much freezing done in this pattern. CAA will have to make up the difference.
Barrow is at -2C this morning under hours of clear skies. Barter Island at -1C. Not going to get much freezing done in this pattern. CAA will have to make up the difference.
Yes. Not much freezing in this part of Arctic and right up the Russian side.
But then again it isn't exactly the big Chinook and melt you were talking about 4 days ago either. ;)
Update on Mercator 300m salinity, aug1-sep30. (every 2days, scale is not static)
http://bulletin.mercator-ocean.fr/en/permalink/PSY4/animation/3/20180801/20180930/2/4
I think the animation posted accurately reflects the Mercator model on the site linked though, as we all should be aware, it's not real. To paraphrase FOoW:Update on Mercator 300m salinity, aug1-sep30. (every 2days, scale is not static)
http://bulletin.mercator-ocean.fr/en/permalink/PSY4/animation/3/20180801/20180930/2/4
Is this still real? And if so, any explanations?
Update on Mercator 300m salinity, aug1-sep30. (every 2days, scale is not static)
http://bulletin.mercator-ocean.fr/en/permalink/PSY4/animation/3/20180801/20180930/2/4
Is this still real? And if so, any explanations?
the dmi 80'N records continue to be shattered every day .. today was the fifth in the sequence . 2 metre temps remain over 8'C above normal .. that is a little below -4'C rather than heading toward the daily norm of nearer -13'C. b.c.
U. Bremen's false colour ice concentration maps show a week's action in the Arctic basin, ending on the map just released, 2018-09-30...Large region of ice winking out in the ESS, balanced by continued growth in the Beaufort and Greenland Sea.
Large region of ice winking out in the ESS, balanced by continued growth in the Beaufort and Greenland Sea.
I wouldn't be surprised if today's JAXA extent change comes in slightly negative.
Can someone explain me how so much heat can intrude towards the N.Pole from the Pacific? How can that happen? Any specific mechanisms?
Can someone explain me how so much heat can intrude towards the N.Pole from the Pacific? How can that happen? Any specific mechanisms?I'll take a punt, Amundsen is not huge lets say 300 by 100 km and the tides are not huge .2-.6m but it's the only game in town. The tidal forcing twice a day drives a current across the Canadian/Alaskan mainland that detatches the incoming Pacific water from the coast at times and consistently provides resistance to it's ingress. The Pacific water backs up and flows instead into the deep west of Chuckchi Plateau here it meets and mixes with the increasing flow of Atl. water coming past the Lomonosov ridge. Some fraction gets caught up in turbulence caused by the tail end of the Amundsen driven current. Just as Amundsen drives water out twice a day so it draws it in, from the general direction of NSI but likely from just north of Chuckchi plateau. The easiest fraction of water to move is the surface so the Pacific waters are also drawn into the area where the Amundsen bound surface current begins.
The late crazy weather is almost behind us now. I expect refreeze to pick up after tomorrow, with the ice edge expanding rapidly towards the Atlantic, etc.Yes, High Arctic temperatures will drop lower sometime (soon or already?), since the present High Arctic temperatures AVERAGE 7degC over average. But as Arctic freezing increases, AGW on the average, will cause present High Arctic temperatures to remain above their 60 year averages.
Wrangel Island also got the highest temperature in October (+7.6°C, 1.3° above previous).+9.3°C reached today. So 3.0° above previous highest which was in 2016.
Reminder that viirs brightness temperature, band15 is handy when Worldview goes dark.
Worldview, Ellesmere, oct2. https://tinyurl.com/yau9af5c
GFS has temp anomaly increasing from 2.7 (now) to 4.5 celsius by Sunday 7th (and staying well above +4 for the week after). The image suggests this could give DMI North of 80 a substantial bump up.The late crazy weather is almost behind us now. I expect refreeze to pick up after tomorrow, with the ice edge expanding rapidly towards the Atlantic, etc.Yes, High Arctic temperatures will drop lower sometime (soon or already?), since the present High Arctic temperatures AVERAGE 7degC over average. But as Arctic freezing increases, AGW on the average, will cause present High Arctic temperatures to remain above their 60 year averages.
Can someone explain me how so much heat can intrude towards the N.Pole from the Pacific? How can that happen? Any specific mechanisms?
Can someone explain me how so much heat can intrude towards the N.Pole from the Pacific? How can that happen? Any specific mechanisms?
Can someone explain me how so much heat can intrude towards the N.Pole from the Pacific? How can that happen? Any specific mechanisms?
Something called an atmospheric wave break...
...We have seen a propensity towards very large and anomalous ridges and heat flux into the high Arctic during the cold season in the last few years. The reason for this tendency is still under research -- though it's interesting to note that some model simulations (like Nakamura et. al's Blue Ocean experiment paper) have a strong tendency for height rises over the Arctic in autumn and winter and part of it has to do with the extra heat flux from the ocean and a coupling feedback from the stratosphere. That's probably not the whole story, but probably part of the puzzle.
With snowcover at all-time highs for this time of year across North America, an extremely early refreeze of HB appears very likely.HB starts normal freezing in the last third of October, but an early start of the refreeze is still possible in the next two weeks. How likely - not sure. Extremely early - IMHO no.
Officially have decent amount of second year ice that will survive in Foxe Basin. Refreeze now underway and should be mostly done in 10-14 days IMO. Very early / at that time the NRN reaches of HB should also begin to freeze.According to the quite reliable UH AMSR2 3.125 data, the ice area in HB has been hovering at less than 100km2 in the last few days, very similar to the data in previous years. Is this a decent amount of soon-to-be second year ice? IMHO no.
Wonder if we officially see multi-year ice classified this time in 2019?
(https://ice-glaces.ec.gc.ca/prods/WIS32SD/20181002180000_WIS32SD_0010257377.gif)
It actually is there! It has been very cloudy but you can clearly see the ice in the eastern edges of Foxe Basin if you roll EOSDIS past few weeks. Some is evidently very thick. The Canadian ice chart guys know their stuff and if you go into their other maps you can see some of it, though now second-year ice, is still diluted down to 50-70% concentration (but with refreeze now starting in earnest, this will quickly turn to 100%).With snowcover at all-time highs for this time of year across North America, an extremely early refreeze of HB appears very likely.HB starts normal freezing in the last third of October, but an early start of the refreeze is still possible in the next two weeks. How likely - not sure. Extremely early - IMHO no.Officially have decent amount of second year ice that will survive in Foxe Basin. Refreeze now underway and should be mostly done in 10-14 days IMO. Very early / at that time the NRN reaches of HB should also begin to freeze.According to the quite reliable UH AMSR2 3.125 data, the ice area in HB has been hovering at less than 100km2 in the last few days, very similar to the data in previous years. Is this a decent amount of soon-to-be second year ice? IMHO no.
Wonder if we officially see multi-year ice classified this time in 2019?
(https://ice-glaces.ec.gc.ca/prods/WIS32SD/20181002180000_WIS32SD_0010257377.gif)
Looking at the two orange locations in Worldview, with all due respect to the Canadian Ice Service I believe the ice they are referring to as having survived to be 2nd year is mostly not there, barring some few tendrils (except in the Fury and Hecla Strait fed by the CAA).
third time above zero (after 2006 and 2016)Hmmm, when I average the four quadrants (estimated) -- (-4.4 + .5 + .9 +1.8 )/4 -- I get -0.3
Changed:
- 2018 -16.675 -15.676 -17.386 -10.064 -4.536 3.415 6.100 5.056 -99
- 9.999 -999.999 -999.999 -999.999
... into:
+ 2018 -16.675 -15.676 -17.386 -10.064 -4.536 3.415 6.100 5.056 -
+ 0.337 -999.999 -999.999 -999.999
DMI North of 80 blips up.Year over year. That is some heat in the ATL! And the entire PAC. However, there is VERY cold water along the AK shoreline, and HB / Labrador are also much colder than 365 days ago.
(Yes, I know of it is somewhat limited value)
Barrow is at -2C this morning under hours of clear skies. Barter Island at -1C. Not going to get much freezing done in this pattern. CAA will have to make up the difference.
Yes. Not much freezing in this part of Arctic and right up the Russian side.
But then again it isn't exactly the big Chinook and melt you were talking about 4 days ago either. ;)
Wouldn't get too comfy. Downsloping flow doesn't really get going until late tonight and tomorrow over NW Alaska as the core of stronger southerly flow aloft shifts eastward from the Strait. Shows up particularly well on the 850 charts. Not much has changed from when this was a 96 hour forecast.
DMI North of 80 blips up.
(Yes, I know of it is somewhat limited value)
DMI North of 80 blips up.It's a good way of tempting A-Team to step back in!
(Yes, I know of it is somewhat limited value)
September 29 - October 3.It's amazing how the Beaufort "Little Blob" is still there, clinging to life.
And it shows clearly the uptick of ice export down the Fram shown by Wipneus' graph on the PIOMAS thread,September 29 - October 3.It's amazing how the Beaufort "Little Blob" is still there, clinging to life.
September 29 - October 3.It's amazing how the Beaufort "Little Blob" is still there, clinging to life.
Should there be an additional "DMI north of 80" plot that is not centered around the North Pole but shifted somewhat SW direction CAA where the center of coldness actually seems to be ?!?To start with, there should be a "DMI north of 80" plot that actually uses an area-weighted average for its plot...
Yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes. This!Should there be an additional "DMI north of 80" plot that is not centered around the North Pole but shifted somewhat SW direction CAA where the center of coldness actually seems to be ?!?To start with, there should be a "DMI north of 80" plot that actually uses an area-weighted average for its plot...
I see no reason to see slow extent gain changing to average increases for the next week or so.Tho 2018 year's September Arctic sea ice extent low did not reach as low as the "2010's" September yearly average extent low, the very slow 2018 daily extent increase had tied the "2010's" daily extent, with over a week left in September. The still slowly increasing 2018 daily extent into October, is now a full one third of a million square kilometers less than the average extent of the "2010's".
It's a good way of tempting A-Team to step back in!
Open water reached well beyond 80 degrees North along the Atlantic Front, and therefore high temperature anomalies North of 80 are likely to slow refreezing. But for most of the Arctic temperatures North of 80 are irrelevant.
It is NOT a coincidence that past 10(?) day's Arctic temperatures over millions of square miles above the 80th parallel are holding strong against average decreases & are presently 8+degC OVER the average..... with no direct solar energy being received at the North Pole.
| Surface area above Arctic Circle million km2 21.046 (8.13 million sq miles) Surface area above 80+ North million km2 3.875 (1.50 million sq miles) |
Open water reached well beyond 80 degrees North along the Atlantic Front, and therefore high temperature anomalies North of 80 are likely to slow refreezing. But for most of the Arctic temperatures North of 80 are irrelevant.
a little more dmi 80 news . Today the top of the world , however measured , managed a full 10'C above the day's mean of near -14'C . This record-breaking run of 8 days polar warmth means temps are where they should have been 30 days ago . This event will end eventually .. b.c.
It's a good way of tempting A-Team to step back in!
I wish. R.I.P. A-Team. :'(
The temperature reading North of 80 can therefore be downright misleading if applied to the Arctic as a whole.But, when compared to comparable average High Arctic temperatures back to 1958, with no or nearly no direct solar irradiation involved, N80 degC temperatures mean bunches of splaying temperatures...... above & way above average.
Indeed gerontocrat (can we call you Mr G ? ) .. but cold is hard to find anywhere atm unless you are a Canadian snowflake ;).a little more dmi 80 news . Today the top of the world , however measured , managed a full 10'C above the day's mean of near -14'C . This record-breaking run of 8 days polar warmth means temps are where they should have been 30 days ago . This event will end eventually .. b.c.
GFS suggests that by next Wednesday the anomaly north of 80 will be +ve but much lower. In contrast the overall Arctic anomaly will increase from the current +2.9 to +4.1 Celsius. The temperature reading North of 80 can therefore be downright misleading if applied to the Arctic as a whole.
Do we know if greenland or CAA experianced record rainfall this year?? Do we have any charts on the migration of extreme rain moving north that may one day be all it needs to take out the ice north of Greenland?
I see no reason to see slow extent gain changing to average increases for the next week or so.Tho 2018 year's September Arctic sea ice extent low did not reach as low as the "2010's" September yearly average extent low, the very slow 2018 daily extent increase had tied the "2010's" daily extent, with over a week left in September. The still slowly increasing 2018 daily extent into October, is now a full one third of a million square kilometers less than the average extent of the "2010's".
It is NOT a coincidence that past 10(?) day's Arctic temperatures over millions of square miles above the 80th parallel are holding strong against average decreases & are presently 8+degC OVER the average..... with no direct solar energy being received at the North Pole.
The end result will be late refreeze and less FDDs to thicken the ice.Good point. The freezing season has not started well. Hopefully it will not follow in the footsteps of 2016/7 all the way to April, or the Arctic will have to dodge another fat bullet in 2019.
The end result will be late refreeze and less FDDs to thicken the ice.Good point. The freezing season has not started well. Hopefully it will not follow in the footsteps of 2016/7 all the way to April, or the Arctic will have to dodge another fat bullet in 2019.
(https://drive.google.com/uc?id=0B1HTR0ONiUmEMFZiLWwxUW15QUk)
I see no reason to see slow extent gain changing to average increases for the next week or so.Tho 2018 year's September Arctic sea ice extent low did not reach as low as the "2010's" September yearly average extent low, the very slow 2018 daily extent increase had tied the "2010's" daily extent, with over a week left in September. The still slowly increasing 2018 daily extent into October, is now a full one third of a million square kilometers less than the average extent of the "2010's".
It is NOT a coincidence that past 10(?) day's Arctic temperatures over millions of square miles above the 80th parallel are holding strong against average decreases & are presently 8+degC OVER the average..... with no direct solar energy being received at the North Pole.
Because of exceptionally low ice in CAA, this should, according to a point by Jim Hunt a while back during rapid refreeze, result in more heat being vented to the atmosphere above the area where there is open water. According to Jim Hunt, the amount of open water (or lack thereof) in the fall before hard refreeze affects how much heat is able vent from the ocean, with more open water facilitating increased discharge of heat from the ocean, which is a good thing. Such discharged heat can then escape from the atmosphere as heat does rather than being trapped under a layer of prematurely frozen ice.
Ocean heat will probably take longer to vent with warmer than normal incoming winds. Waves also probably discourage overturning.
edit: Windy ecmwftempwave forecast oct5-14 (decided wave forecast was more relevant)
This theory is incorrect also the CAA has retained more ice this year than any other this millennium (maybe even longer)I see no reason to see slow extent gain changing to average increases for the next week or so.Tho 2018 year's September Arctic sea ice extent low did not reach as low as the "2010's" September yearly average extent low, the very slow 2018 daily extent increase had tied the "2010's" daily extent, with over a week left in September. The still slowly increasing 2018 daily extent into October, is now a full one third of a million square kilometers less than the average extent of the "2010's".
It is NOT a coincidence that past 10(?) day's Arctic temperatures over millions of square miles above the 80th parallel are holding strong against average decreases & are presently 8+degC OVER the average..... with no direct solar energy being received at the North Pole.
Because of exceptionally low ice in CAA, this should, according to a point by Jim Hunt a while back during rapid refreeze, result in more heat being vented to the atmosphere above the area where there is open water. According to Jim Hunt, the amount of open water (or lack thereof) in the fall before hard refreeze affects how much heat is able vent from the ocean, with more open water facilitating increased discharge of heat from the ocean, which is a good thing. Such discharged heat can then escape from the atmosphere as heat does rather than being trapped under a layer of prematurely frozen ice.
Ocean heat will probably take longer to vent with warmer than normal incoming winds. Waves also probably discourage overturning.Thanks, this format is more easily readable.
edit: Windy ecmwftempwave forecast oct5-14 (decided wave forecast was more relevant)
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory, has released the 2018 experimental projected onset of sea ice freeze-up on the Chukchi Sea continental shelf.
Projection: Freeze onset on the Chukchi Sea continental shelf northwest of Icy Cape will begin the second week of December 2018. This is approximately 47 days later than the long-term mean (1981-2016).
This unusual Spike has to be something rapid, not just Heat from the Arctic Ocean+ Transport from Subtropics.
October 1-5.It's amazing. We are into October and the inner basin refuses to seriously freeze anywhere. The only growth is occurring in the Greenland Sea and the Beaufort export terminals. The only real freezing is occurring in the sheltered CAA. Hopefully this will soon be over, but it's still disturbing.
Could it be said that the freezing itself would be on schedule if changed atmospheric and ocenanic patterns wouldn't just keep on pushing in heat essentially from outside the Arctic? (Which in earlier times would have remained outside the Arctic)October 1-5.It's amazing. We are into October and the inner basin refuses to seriously freeze anywhere. The only growth is occurring in the Greenland Sea and the Beaufort export terminals. The only real freezing is occurring in the sheltered CAA. Hopefully this will soon be over, but it's still disturbing.
I remember Jim Hunt stating a year or two ago.....
Remember that is just one component and not the full heat budget - which is partially why it is inappropriate. For the full budget we have to include latent heat flux, long wave radiation, short wave radiation, energy changes through state changes when ice grows and decays, and so on. Also large heat fluxes lead to rapid sea ice growth which then insulates the ocean from further heat loss.
October 1-5.It's amazing. We are into October and the inner basin refuses to seriously freeze anywhere. The only growth is occurring in the Greenland Sea and the Beaufort export terminals. The only real freezing is occurring in the sheltered CAA. Hopefully this will soon be over, but it's still disturbing.
We're dealing with a complex system in the Arctic. Attempts to oversimplify the complexity lead to misunderstandings.
October 1-5.I wonder whether this little (remains of multi year?) ice floe N of Alaska in the W Beaufort Sea will survive until re-freeze starts in that area?!?
..... at this super early point, I think it is already reasonable to assume this freezing season will be super weakDon't know if present 10degC over average High Arctic temps guarantee low ice for the coming cold season. But, this present leap from average High Arctic temps seems strongly connected to the surge of High Arctic temperatures that began 2 years ago & maybe 3 years ago, during times of no or little direct solar energy in the Arctic.
Could it be said that the freezing itself would be on schedule if changed atmospheric and ocenanic patterns wouldn't just keep on pushing in heat essentially from outside the Arctic? (Which in earlier times would have remained outside the Arctic)October 1-5.It's amazing. We are into October and the inner basin refuses to seriously freeze anywhere. The only growth is occurring in the Greenland Sea and the Beaufort export terminals. The only real freezing is occurring in the sheltered CAA. Hopefully this will soon be over, but it's still disturbing.
DMI SST anomaly October 3 2017 vs 2018:
edit: I just saw I have Oct 2 2016 in my archive as well...
DMI SST anomaly October 3 2017 vs 2018:
edit: I just saw I have Oct 2 2016 in my archive as well...
I don't get it. Atlantification is stronger than ever (more open water on the ATL front up North), yet SST was much higher in 2016 and 2017 on the Atlantic side than in 2018. Currently we do not even have very strong positive SST anomalies in the N ATL and yet we have more open water than ever. How come???
Apparently a major reason that warm Atlantic water was moving into the Arctic from 2005 through 2012 was a weak overturning circulation. Instead of heading for the Greenland and Labrador seas, warm salty water headed up the coast of Norway for the Arctic ocean.....
With present High Arctic temperatures averaging 10degC over the historical satellite average, Arctic sea ice increases continue lethargically, the gap to the present "2010's Arctic sea ice" average widening again to 440,000 square kilometers LESS.I see no reason to see slow extent gain changing to average increases for the next week or so.Tho 2018 year's September Arctic sea ice extent low did not reach as low as the "2010's" September yearly average extent low, the very slow 2018 daily extent increase had tied the "2010's" daily extent, with over a week left in September. The still slowly increasing 2018 daily extent into October, is now a full one third of a million square kilometers less than the average extent of the "2010's".
Isn't there a 963mb GAC tomorrow??fairer perhaps to call it a lac .. a little Arctic cyclone .. or by duration , a sac .. short Arctic cyclone . b.c. :)
My understanding of that:
Why would a weaker AMOC lead to more transport up Norway instead of Labrador?
DMI SST anomaly October 3 2017 vs 2018:
edit: I just saw I have Oct 2 2016 in my archive as well...
I don't get it. Atlantification is stronger than ever (more open water on the ATL front up North), yet SST was much higher in 2016 and 2017 on the Atlantic side than in 2018. Currently we do not even have very strong positive SST anomalies in the N ATL and yet we have more open water than ever. How come???
Ascat, day261-280 (2.2MB)
The pack is still very mobile.
Some signs of refreeze on the ice edge (maybe wind driven slush or snow on thin ice)
Export of thicker ice continues into the CAA.
Export accelerates into the Fram Strait.
Open water north of SZ continues. (Less damping effect on storms running up the Barents into the Laptev)
tech note: images enhanced - brightness/contrast, clahe, unsharp mask
edit: Refreeze in Mackenzie Bay
My understanding of the weak overturning leading to increased flow of Atlantic water into the Barents sea and Arctic ocean was improved by reading a real climate post by Stephan Rahmsdorf. It cleared up much of my confusion on the topic. He refers to recent papers in the scientific literature about what has been happening in the far north Atlantic.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2018/04/stronger-evidence-for-a-weaker-atlantic-overturning-circulation/
Well, it depends on the definition of the of the AMOC whether it's changing locations or slowing down...
My understanding of the weak overturning leading to increased flow of Atlantic water into the Barents sea and Arctic ocean was improved by reading a real climate post by Stephan Rahmsdorf. It cleared up much of my confusion on the topic. He refers to recent papers in the scientific literature about what has been happening in the far north Atlantic.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2018/04/stronger-evidence-for-a-weaker-atlantic-overturning-circulation/
It wasn't clear to me reading that that they were measuring a slowdown rather than a movement (change of place). It seemed to me that the only real data demonstrated that there was less water flowing in a particular region. It also seems to me that we over the last few years have noticed considerable changes in the extreme North-East Atlantic.
Is the AMOC actually slowing down, or is it just changing location?
Is the ice in Fram Strait right now old ice or newly frozen ice?
These images are based on an updated soon-to-be-released version of the current sea ice age product and a near-real-time version for 2018.
Credit: M. Tschudi, S. Stewart, University of Colorado, Boulder, and W. Meier, J. Stroeve, NSIDC
Also the corresponding ice age map
(https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/files/2018/10/Figure5a.png)
The scary part is that the older ice has just lifted off the CAA and been set adrift in the CAB.
Presuming the satellite coverage is not good enough to make them now, moving into the dark season.
They're based on passive microwave radiometry, right? So not actually affected by dark vs light.
....the gap to the present "2010's Arctic sea ice" average widening again to 440,000 square kilometers LESS. Ice in the heat heat heat is hard to harden.With High Arctic days of 10degC over-average temperatures, the ho hum yearly September low 2018 sea ice has rapidly switched places with other years of lower sea ice including 2007. 2018 Arctic sea ice is 550,000 square kilometers LESS than the to-date "2010's sea ice average". 2018 now has more to-date sea ice than ONLY the year 2012, which had a spectacular loss of sea ice, much going away due to fortuitous winds that drove ices into the North Atlantic.
Decision time. Either the CAB starts refreezing, or it's going into unknown territory.The CAB actually is having some minimal refreezing. But the export machine has gone into overdrive. The heart of the ice N of Greenland 30 days ago is now located somewhere southwest of Svalbard and heading for what is probably rapid death in the Greenland Sea.
Not good! Neven's refreeze is fake news! Fake news!!! 8) 8) 8)
The big question is of course: are we transitioning to a new climate mode (huge low pressure zones and storms above the Arctic, sucking in warm air from the midlatitudes, keeping the Arctic fairly warm, not letting the ice freeze, which keeps the stormy weather alive/low pressure systems in a feedback loop)?
The big question is of course: are we transitioning to a new climate mode (huge low pressure zones and storms above the Arctic, sucking in warm air from the midlatitudes, keeping the Arctic fairly warm, not letting the ice freeze, which keeps the stormy weather alive/low pressure systems in a feedback loop)?
Are you suggesting that the southern wall of the Arctic Polar Cell is breaking down?
Decision time. Either the CAB starts refreezing, or it's going into unknown territory.Another graph in which the pen now writes a line on previously untouched areas (see also Global Sea Ice Extent Graph)
The big question is of course: are we transitioning to a new climate mode (huge low pressure zones and storms above the Arctic, sucking in warm air from the midlatitudes, keeping the Arctic fairly warm, not letting the ice freeze, which keeps the stormy weather alive/low pressure systems in a feedback loop)?
Are you suggesting that the southern wall of the Arctic Polar Cell is breaking down?
I do not know. There are many people here who know much much more about the climate than me. I am just curious and I have long thought that eventually we are going to see a big and more or less permanent low pressure zone above the Arctic which will change the climate of the NH
Pretty obvious that the thickest ice is now finding an easy path out of the CAB through the CAA.Hycom ice thickness is similar. 0917-1009 (Quite a lot of 0m coastal ice though)
I don't like the global SIE graph. It obscures what is going on in the Arctic.
It is very annoying that when you copy the image, the temperature markers on the bar do not copy. You can see them on the site.
Pretty obvious that the thickest ice is now finding an easy path out of the CAB through the CAA.Hycom ice thickness is similar. 0917-1009 (Quite a lot of 0m coastal ice though)
edit:worked on the gif a bit
I've seen Fram exports graphs before but can't find themWipneus posts them from time to time in the PIOMAS thread.
How much extent gain has taken place in the arctic thus far exactly?
I thought refreeze in the Beaufort was going to take hold, but it doesn't look so convincing over the last two days.On the plus side, we finally have a reincarnation of "Big Block" to track into 2019...!
Worldview, Beaufort oct10-11
Greenland Ice Sheet temperatures have been below average. Appears that some of the Ice Sheet cold has slipped into the seas northeast of Greenland...the flow of atmospheric cold remains sub-average & a thin stream of that recent Greenland cold made a beeline to the North Pole. The High Arctic air temperatures now are fluttering up & down.For the last 20+ days High Arctic average temperatures have been 9-10+ degC over average. Now with that thin beeline cold funneling directly to the North Pole, High Arctic temperatures have dropped to 8degC over average.
Finally, actual freezing in the Laptev sector.But on the other hand look at the sea ice concentration in the Arctic north of 85. I attach Univ Bremen false colour images Oct 11 and Oct 7.
This Season we are gonna be lucky if the Bering gets any Ice on the Arctic Ocean Side...
That, coupled with El Nino is terrible, horrible, very, very bad, no good for 2019 Melt Season.
October 7-11.
Appears that some of the Ice Sheet cold has slipped into the seas northeast of Greenland. Despite down slope warming, the flow of atmospheric cold remains sub-average.....After some of the cold moved off the Greenland Ice Sheet to the northeast, a warm front replaced it on the eastern half of the Ice Sheet.
The problem on the Bering side is the unprecedented heat flux into the Arctic. Warm, moderatly salty Pacific water has flowed into the Arctic then descended to the 30m to 100m level, below the fresh water layer caused by Siberian river ...This has the sense about it as being a change in system-state - that increased base enthalpy present the Bering and Chukchi may have tipped them over into a new climate regime.
If this becomes true, it should be named "Abrupt Climate Change" for Bering and Chukchi Sea.Very much so. Even now, even with shorter days, because of the lack of ice cover both of those seas are still picking up isolation and downwelling longwave radiation.
The problem on the Bering side is the unprecedented heat flux into the Arctic. Warm, moderatly salty Pacific water has flowed into the Arctic then descended to the 30m to 100m level, below the fresh water layer caused by Siberian river ...This has the sense about it as being a change in system-state - that increased base enthalpy present the Bering and Chukchi may have tipped them over into a new climate regime.
The next few months may be definitive. If the Bering in particular continues at the low levels of area over winter, the heat budget it has will be altered radically by way of increased capture of spring insolation. This may be a precursor to tip over.
If this becomes true, it should be named "Abrupt Climate Change" for Bering and Chukchi Sea.Very much so. Even now, even with shorter days, because of the lack of ice cover both of those seas are still picking up isolation and downwelling longwave radiation.
That radiation is not enough to stop the refreeze, but is a very substantial increase to the seas annual heat capture.
Meanwhile, outgoing heat out of the atmosphere is limited by physics and *can't* increase except in smaller increments determined by temperatures in the upper atmosphere. As a metaphor, we are increasing the flow of water into a tub without changing the size of the drain.
100 wm2ish. It is not insignificant.
I think that the effect warm air advection into the Arctic increasing clouds and downwelling radiation is a major uncertainty in modelling future Arctic conditions.
The 365-day anomaly is rather interesting too in that there seems to be a band somewhat colder than historical just below the very warm Arctic. WACCy weather. (Given the cold spots in the North Atlantic and in the South Pacific, is there any chance this is at least in part a latitude thing?)It is because shifting AMOC / NPAC pattern is putting Canada in the "snow zone" and it is now snowing and sticking for much longer each year versus only a few years ago (and even against 1971-2000 climo).
The shift the past six years is the difference in 20C worth of monthly temps in some months for many regions.
Sorry it is only 10C worth of monthly temp differential, my b! (At least it was in September -- some months it can be greater).The shift the past six years is the difference in 20C worth of monthly temps in some months for many regions.
Can you give some examples? This strikes me as quite hyperbolic.
100 wm2ish. It is not insignificant.Thank you for saving me some time.
I think that the effect warm air advection into the Arctic increasing clouds and downwelling radiation is a major uncertainty in modelling future Arctic conditions.It is without question a serious uncertainty. It's part of why we really can't use a single year, or even two or three consecutive years to skillfully predict the rate at which the ice is going to decline. We can only elucidate *direction* which is down.
<snippage>
At this point I think it's too soon to know if we are reaching a tipping point on the Alaskan side of the Arctic, but we have seen some stunning changes the past 3 years.
The 365-day anomaly is rather interesting too in that there seems to be a band somewhat colder than historical just below the very warm Arctic. WACCy weather. (Given the cold spots in the North Atlantic and in the South Pacific, is there any chance this is at least in part a latitude thing?)I think what you are seeing is evidence of the breakdown of the polar cell, and the export of cold air it previously sequestered breaking out into lower latitudes, while being replaced by much warmer and moister inflows.
The 365-day anomaly is rather interesting too in that there seems to be a band somewhat colder than historical just below the very warm Arctic. WACCy weather. (Given the cold spots in the North Atlantic and in the South Pacific, is there any chance this is at least in part a latitude thing?)I think what you are seeing is evidence of the breakdown of the polar cell, and the export of cold air it previously sequestered breaking out into lower latitudes, while being replaced by much warmer and moister inflows.
The thing is, it's not really colder continents - its cold exported from the Arctic - and the increased snowfall is actually an artifact of *more* rather than less heat. You can't have the increased snowfall without increased water vapor, and you can't have increased water vapor without increased heat. Pure physical chemistry, nothing exotic here.The 365-day anomaly is rather interesting too in that there seems to be a band somewhat colder than historical just below the very warm Arctic. WACCy weather. (Given the cold spots in the North Atlantic and in the South Pacific, is there any chance this is at least in part a latitude thing?)I think what you are seeing is evidence of the breakdown of the polar cell, and the export of cold air it previously sequestered breaking out into lower latitudes, while being replaced by much warmer and moister inflows.
That describes part of the process. here's an interesting article with some more detail.
<snippage>
...And if we take an even bigger step back, and take a look at 2007-2018 vs the averages of the 20th century, then the picture is even more clear. The "warmth" is spreading from the north towards the south
I find it interesting that the 365-day mean air temperature is barely cold enough to freeze sea ice. How warm is the water under that ice?
And after the Arctic is sorted out (shouldn't take long), a quick trip to the Antarctic to show the British Antarctic Survey at the University of Cambridge how it should be done.I find it interesting that the 365-day mean air temperature is barely cold enough to freeze sea ice. How warm is the water under that ice?
Why do I always see that question? I wonder if there are any monitoring devices up there? Whatever happened to that camera on Buoy 14? Last I clicked on it I saw a shot from 2 years ago! Why doesn't Neven send a team of crack Sea Ice Forum members up inside 80N and answer some of these questions for us? He's sitting there warm in his mansion...LORD knows where....collecting all the loot generated by this world-class forum, and does nothing to answer these nagging quesions: What is the temperature of the water 753 fathoms under that ice-flow off Ellsemere? How many healthy Polar bears are frolicking in Franz Josephland?
Just send Juan and Jim and Fishoutofwater (PLEASE!) and Wip and Geronimo and set them up with a few tents and a stack of firewood up on some ice-flow circling the CAB, and they can do the rest. Let's get some answers!
...And if we take an even bigger step back, and take a look at 2007-2018 vs the averages of the 20th century, then the picture is even more clear. The "warmth" is spreading from the north towards the south
Probably should have said 'the increase in warmth'...And if we take an even bigger step back, and take a look at 2007-2018 vs the averages of the 20th century, then the picture is even more clear. The "warmth" is spreading from the north towards the south
Just theoretically ofcourse, but normaly it spreads from the equator to the poles.
The 365-day anomaly is rather interesting too in that there seems to be a band somewhat colder than historical just below the very warm Arctic. WACCy weather. (Given the cold spots in the North Atlantic and in the South Pacific, is there any chance this is at least in part a latitude thing?)I think what you are seeing is evidence of the breakdown of the polar cell, and the export of cold air it previously sequestered breaking out into lower latitudes, while being replaced by much warmer and moister inflows.
So I do not buy the WACCy theory, because I see the exact opposites: the warmer the arctic, the warmer the continents
That describes part of the process. here's an interesting article with some more detail.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/09/22/one-of-the-most-bizarre-ideas-about-climate-change-just-got-more-support/
Well, do you look at the whole year or just a season?That describes part of the process. here's an interesting article with some more detail.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/09/22/one-of-the-most-bizarre-ideas-about-climate-change-just-got-more-support/
I notice that the proposed notion of WACCy is that the Arctic is warming faster than the continents, and the skeptics are saying that the continents are not getting colder. There seems to be a disconnect there.
Well, do you look at the whole year or just a season?That describes part of the process. here's an interesting article with some more detail.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/09/22/one-of-the-most-bizarre-ideas-about-climate-change-just-got-more-support/
I notice that the proposed notion of WACCy is that the Arctic is warming faster than the continents, and the skeptics are saying that the continents are not getting colder. There seems to be a disconnect there.
If the last 12 months are any indicator, the Baffin / Labrador front is going to be extremely impressive this winter, and the Hudson refreeze should be mostly complete by 11/15. The cold in Baffin and Labrador is already very impressive vs. normal and ice formation is racing down from the MYI on Nares (with FYI also now forming on shorelines).Hudson Bay normally completes freezing in mid-December. I'd be extremely surprised if your prediction of mid-November came true. Will you revisit it when the time comes?
Will the Bering Strait freeze at all this year? We are two months and one week from solar minimum and the entire area is blazingly hot. Worse than 2016 or 2017.
Yes! I shall re: Hudson Bay.QuoteIf the last 12 months are any indicator, the Baffin / Labrador front is going to be extremely impressive this winter, and the Hudson refreeze should be mostly complete by 11/15. The cold in Baffin and Labrador is already very impressive vs. normal and ice formation is racing down from the MYI on Nares (with FYI also now forming on shorelines).Hudson Bay normally completes freezing in mid-December. I'd be extremely surprised if your prediction of mid-November came true. Will you revisit it when the time comes?
Will the Bering Strait freeze at all this year? We are two months and one week from solar minimum and the entire area is blazingly hot. Worse than 2016 or 2017.
As to Bering Strait, I am certain it will freeze at some point this winter. Max is still 4-5 months away.
As to Bering Strait, I am certain it will freeze at some point this winter. Max is still 4-5 months away.
Will you revisit it when the time comes?
As to Bering Strait, I am certain it will freeze at some point this winter. Max is still 4-5 months away.I know you're talking about specific parts of the Arctic. In general tho, the last 3-4 years of Arctic sea ice extent maximums have been 14million square kilometers or less. During the 1980s, arctic sea ice extents have been 14 million square kilometers.... on January first!! It's "almost" like the Arctic is losing 2+ months of winter freeze.
WACC is a pattern of relative warmth and cold in a warming climate. It doesn't mean that the continents are getting colder. WACC happens when the polar vortex is weak and cold air pours out over the continents in the cold months.
As to Bering Strait, I am certain it will freeze at some point this winter. Max is still 4-5 months away.
I wouldn't be certain. The strait is several degrees C warmer than it was last year, and freezing south of the strait was very limited was last year. It is also saltier (i think). And the chukchi sea is way warmer and saltier too.
I predict it does freeze but that it is pretty much the southern limit. Obviously there will be some coastal freezing, however I think overall the bering sea will sea close to ZERO ice this winter/spring.
The “oldest, thickest sea ice in the Arctic” seems to be vanishing before our very eyes.
Ron must be a big fan of “Snow White”!
I don't really get cci gfs 2m anomalies. It doesn't seem to match EC and GFS models on meteociel at all. Yeah sure there are some positive Temp 850hPa anomalies on meteociel as well, but nothing dramatic, and there are even some negative fields on the map. While on the other hand when I go to cci GFS it shows half of Arctic "burning in red", especially the Russian side. Now my question is, is that because there is so much open water compared to average there. So the 2m temps stay much higher than they should because there is no ice? Like in May or June when Temp850hPa explode for days but 2m temperature stays around 0C (32F), because of the ice over that area, just the opposite right now? That came to my mind cause the biggest difference between cci temp 2m and meteociel EC, GFS, temp850hPa is on the Russian side (Laptev and ESS) even though we have "pretty stable vortex" (compared to last 5 years), and cold air hanging there. I mean cci has Russian coast (the land) close to the average around day 7 (somewhere below, somewhere above), and it seems to follow meteociel GFS very well, but the seas are "burning".
Comparison, same date, same model (GFS 6z)
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmodeles.meteociel.fr%2Fmodeles%2Fgfs%2Fruns%2F2018101506%2Fgfsnh-15-186.png%3F6&hash=a966e9b6ba2d2d228c251119c96e5842)
(https://climatereanalyzer.org/wx_frames/gfs/arc-lea/t2anom/2018-10-15-06z/66.png)
I mean look at the Bering Strait 850hPa anomalies, they are the highest on meteociel, but cci 2m seems to follow that very well, perhaps because there shouldn't be ice there anyway, compared to the average?
I mean if that is the case, on the one hand, it is good news, cause lot of stored heat should go away under this "cold spell", but on the other hand it is really bad news, cause if the area would have been already ice covered it could have used these weather conditions to thicken a little bit, cause we know how unstable polar vortex is lately, and it is only a matter of time before there is another "attack" from the south. But now even if the ice forms there at the end of this period(7-10days), and that is a big IF, it will be very thin, and very vulnerable if there is another warm air advection from lower latitudes end of Oct or even beginning of Nov.Found this paper, may be useful in understanding the dynamics. It's going to take a while for me to digest it; the calculus will be a challenge for me. However, I'm able glean some useful tidbits from it about the general dynamics which apply:
I don't really get cci gfs 2m anomalies. It doesn't seem to match EC and GFS models on meteociel at all. Yeah sure there are some positive Temp 850hPa anomalies on meteociel as well, but nothing dramatic, and there are even some negative fields on the map."
I don't really get cci gfs 2m anomalies.That is not the same date output...
Comparison, same date, same model (GFS 6z)
I don't really get cci gfs 2m anomalies. It doesn't seem to match EC and GFS models on meteociel at all. Yeah sure there are some positive Temp 850hPa anomalies on meteociel as well, but nothing dramatic, and there are even some negative fields on the map.
Well it sure would be great if A-Team could come back with those amazing animations and descriptions of the ice flow. Especially given what's going on with all the export of multi-year ice. ;)
Well it sure would be great if A-Team could come back with those amazing animations
http://GreatWhiteCon.info/2018/10/an-unusual-sea-ice-situation-north-of-greenland/
I followed the link and then followed the link to CryoSat-2 via the Centre for Polar Observation and Monitoring: http://www.cpom.ucl.ac.uk/csopr/seaice.html
And what did I find? The Arctic divided into basins. The same as NSIDC uses? Partly yes, mostly no. See attached example - the Canadian Archipelago has swallowed part of the Beaufort.
I don't really get cci gfs 2m anomalies. It doesn't seem to match EC and GFS models on meteociel at all. Yeah sure there are some positive Temp 850hPa anomalies on meteociel as well, but nothing dramatic, and there are even some negative fields on the map.
But why should 2m anomalies match anomalies at 850 hPa level (which is approximately at an altitude of 1500m) ? Anomalies can be completely different for example when large anticyclones are at play and a strong inversion sets up at surface level.
With inversions you can have below normal 2m anomalies and above at 1500m the air can be well above normal.
So at the end of the day, all this late refreeze can be inconsequential to what happens next year.
And what did I find? The Arctic divided into basins. The same as NSIDC uses?
Hullo Jim,And what did I find? The Arctic divided into basins. The same as NSIDC uses?
Not really! You can download the gridded data if you wish, and aggregate it any which way you choose:
http://www.cpom.ucl.ac.uk/csopr/data.html
You don't need to be "really clever", but I guess that's not necessarily right up the street of the average "amateur".
please, pretty please - I need some 'elp.
I will give it a go when I feel like making myself really confused and frustrated.
A bridge too far I think, which is a shame. Adding the NSIDC sea code as an extra column in the cryosat-2 data would make it so easy to produce analyses by each sea and groups of seas to compare with area and extent data from the NSIDC excel files.
In this case, they should. There is no strong wind, no additional moisture, no inversion, not much precipitation, not much sunlight to warm lower altitudes so dramatically, no tight Isobars, no big cyclones, no huge waves. Nothing that extraordinary, EXCEPT NO ICE. Temperature will stay at or above 0C over open water, even if temp 850hPa drops to -20C, as long as there is no ice coverage.
With the High Arctic temperatures now fluttering up & down, due first to half of Greenland Ice Sheet atmosphere at sub-average temperatures, flowing into the Seas northeast of Greenland & a portion then flowing to the NP. Second, a warm front replaced the cold on the eastern half of the Greenland Ice Sheet. Third, that very temporary warmth has mostly been pushed off the Ice Sheet, & flows into the High Arctic, supporting warm temperatures there. Fourth, looking at the Greenland Ice Sheet again, cold envelopes it, pumped from the vast cold atmosphere that has over-taken all of mid-Canada, the middle of the U.S. & even into northern Mexico.Appears that some of the Ice Sheet cold has slipped into the seas northeast of Greenland. Despite down slope warming, the flow of atmospheric cold remains sub-average.....After some of the cold moved off the Greenland Ice Sheet to the northeast, a warm front replaced it on the eastern half of the Ice Sheet.
A modified NSDIC region mask (Baltic sea added) is included in the upcoming v2.1 of the AWI CryoSat-2 sea ice product for both the grids and the daily trajectory data sets.
Shendric -that is the best news I have heard in ages. Just think - cryosat-2 data according to NSIDC regions. All we need now is a few years data, say until 2025, but patience is a virtue.QuoteA bridge too far I think, which is a shame. Adding the NSIDC sea code as an extra column in the cryosat-2 data would make it so easy to produce analyses by each sea and groups of seas to compare with area and extent data from the NSIDC excel files.
A modified NSDIC region mask (Baltic sea added) is included in the upcoming v2.1 of the AWI CryoSat-2 sea ice product for both the grids and the daily trajectory data sets.
Cheers, Stefan
<snip A few ad hominems can be tossed around in the political and other threads, but in the primary threads such as this one, members are expected to shy away from pointless insults and instead post productive commentary. Thanks! ~~JP>
It is insulting to respond to a comment with a simple "incorrect". That's even shorter and emptier in intellect than Trump's "fake news" tuits.
So I wanted to respond displaying the same attitude of an ignorant. ;) Nothing else. Good luck with that member
Thanks very much for that most interesting information Stefan.
Have you fixed the 2.1 release date yet by any chance?
Agree, disagree?
Interesting study from MIT shows a change in the rotational speed of the Beaufort Gyre due to loss of ice in that area. This seems to affect many of the parameters associated with ice drift, salinity , AMOC etc.
Perhaps other more learned Forum members might like to discuss the repercussions .....
http://news.mit.edu/2018/arctic-ice-sets-speed-ocean-current-1017
Both can be happening at the same time.Interesting study from MIT shows a change in the rotational speed of the Beaufort Gyre due to loss of ice in that area. This seems to affect many of the parameters associated with ice drift, salinity , AMOC etc.
Perhaps other more learned Forum members might like to discuss the repercussions .....
http://news.mit.edu/2018/arctic-ice-sets-speed-ocean-current-1017
I have read here just about the opposite, and from people like A-Team. That the Gyre is losing strength due to more cyclonic weather of late years and because thicker ice used to help better in transferring the anticyclonic motion of airmasses to the ocean in Winter and Spring . So go figure...
Of course, both antagonistic effects end up with catastrophic consequences.
This makes me lose a bit of confidence, then I forget it and I trust scientists again.
'Ware scientists who only look at one thing that is going on and dismiss all others. This is uncharted territory with very little data about what is going on down there under the surface.
Anyway - "that is my opinion and it belongs to me".
That paper is saying what A-Team and I have been saying for some time. There are a number of papers about the increase in the fresh water content of the Beaufort gyre from 2000 - 2015. We know that the gyre has spun up with the decline of multiyear sea ice and we know why. This paper quantifies it and models it.Trouble is the paper is subscriber only, so people like me have no idea if the paper gives any idea of
What A-Team and I have been saying is that there is now evidence of weakening of the gyre in response to increased storminess over the past several years. The release of fresh water from the gyre is one of the causes of the cold SST anomaly in the Greenland and Labrador seas.
Key region CAB is late freezing this year.
If they gave an actual link to the paper one of us could probably pull it up. Instead, they give us their science writer's PR and no link to the source.
And note the Mercator 10 day projection in the middle. The profile is much saltier than the profile 10 days earlier. It looks like I have found a problem with the forecast model.
Arctic Ocean measurements reveal a near doubling of ocean heat content relative to the freezing temperature in the Beaufort Gyre halocline over the past three decades (1987–2017). This warming is linked to anomalous solar heating of surface waters in the northern Chukchi Sea, a main entryway for halocline waters to join the interior Beaufort Gyre. Summer solar heat absorption by the surface waters has increased fivefold over the same time period, chiefly because of reduced sea ice coverage. It is shown that the solar heating, considered together with subduction rates of surface water in this region, is sufficient to account for the observed halocline
warming. Heat absorption at the basin margins and its subsequent accumulation in the ocean interior, therefore, have consequences for Beaufort Gyre sea ice beyond the summer season.
Sorry about that, I was using Sterks terminology ;)Key region CAB is late freezing this year.how do you mean "key-region" ?<snippage>
Thick ice making its way down the Mclure Strait.I think all this MYI will make the northern CAA a laggard in summer 2019, as it was this year.
Thick ice making its way down the Mclure Strait.I think all this MYI will make the northern CAA a laggard in summer 2019, as it was this year.
This should slow down the freezing season in the Chukchi this winter and slow the onset of deep convection in the Labrador sea.Roughly, what is the time it takes for Chuckchi water to reach the Labrador sea?
What's important to us now is that the Chukchi is changing rapidly before our eyes into a mostly ice free region in the arctic. This will affect both the atmosphere and the ocean in years to come and this year well into late fall and early winter.
Thanks for that animation Aluminium.ascat, sep27-oct17 appears to show it is related to the plucky patch of old ice
The time lapse shows something we don't see too often. A flash freeze in the central Beaufort. Usually ice freeze either extends out from the main pack edges or from the continent edges. Here we can see a large freeze in the central Beaufort that was not connected to the main pack.
Not sure if this is connected with that patch of old ice in the Beaufort (I thought it had migrated further west) or maybe an area of low salinity water surrounded by slightly higher salinity that froze first ?
Thanks for that animation Aluminium.
The time lapse shows something we don't see too often. A flash freeze in the central Beaufort. Usually ice freeze either extends out from the main pack edges or from the continent edges. Here we can see a large freeze in the central Beaufort that was not connected to the main pack.
Not sure if this is connected with that patch of old ice in the Beaufort (I thought it had migrated further west) or maybe an area of low salinity water surrounded by slightly higher salinity that froze first ?
October 13-17.Hey, that's a cool animation, could you extend it to start few days (say 4) days earlier and end in about 4-7 more?
Niall,Yes, Tor I saw that earlier. Thought it was a bit like a euro symbol.
Is that a giant jellyfish on the right?
;D ::) :P
Hey, that's a cool animation, could you extend it to start few days (say 4) days earlier and end in about 4-7 more?After 4-7 days, of course. I saved single images since June 8.
ESRL ice and snow thickness forecast, oct17-24. Steady pack expansion and Alaskan, ESS and Laptev coastal ice growth over the next week. (Missed the Beaufort flash freeze though)
To-date 2018 Arctic sea ice is 720,000 square kilometers LESS than the to-date "2010's sea ice average".....the gap to the present "2010's Arctic sea ice" average widening again to 440,000 square kilometers LESS......2018 Arctic sea ice is 550,000 square kilometers LESS than the to-date "2010's sea ice average". 2018 now has more to-date sea ice than ONLY the year 2012, which had a spectacular loss of sea ice, much going away due to fortuitous winds that drove ices into the North Atlantic.
It is not coincidental that the 2016 wild DECREASE in sea ice GAIN, occurred when the gap between the satellite average High Arctic temperature & 2016 High Arctic temperature, was at its widest ever ( ~ +20degC) averaged over millions of square kilometers.Yes indeed! During this time of year when Arctic sea ice rapidly increases, there are very very few short periods of Arctic sea ice DECREASES. Yet, 2016 had two distinct periods of sea ice decrease, both losing periods occurring when 1) High Arctic temperature over millions of square kilometers was 20(+?) degC above average & 2) High Arctic temperature over millions of square kilometers was ~ 16degC above average. As stated previously, 2018 may be setting itself up for a wild decrease in sea ice, if present 2018 High Arctic high temperatures go even higher.
Great, looking at the patterns of ice growth over all the marginal Seas could be illuminating.Hey, that's a cool animation, could you extend it to start few days (say 4) days earlier and end in about 4-7 more?After 4-7 days, of course. I saved single images since June 8.
To-date 2018 Arctic sea ice is three quarters of a million square kilometers LESS than the to-date "2010's sea ice average".To-date 2018 Arctic sea ice is 720,000 square kilometers LESS than the to-date "2010's sea ice average".....the gap to the present "2010's Arctic sea ice" average widening again to 440,000 square kilometers LESS......2018 Arctic sea ice is 550,000 square kilometers LESS than the to-date "2010's sea ice average". 2018 now has more to-date sea ice than ONLY the year 2012, which had a spectacular loss of sea ice, much going away due to fortuitous winds that drove ices into the North Atlantic.
That new ice is very thin. The NSIDC resolution may be exaggerating the change a little. ;)ESRL ice and snow thickness forecast, oct17-24. Steady pack expansion and Alaskan, ESS and Laptev coastal ice growth over the next week. (Missed the Beaufort flash freeze though)
It's strange alright that ESRL did not pick up on the sudden changes in the more western Beaufort.
Here is the NSIDC view on Oct 17th. That Beaufort blob does look remarkable, compared with the image 3 days earlier.
That new ice is very thin. The NSIDC resolution may be exaggerating the change a little. ;)
Abstract
Reduced precipitation rates allow pollution within air parcels from midlatitudes to reach the Arctic without being scavenged. We use satellite and tracer transport model data sets to evaluate the degree of supercooling required for 50% of a chosen ensemble of low‐level clouds to be in the ice phase for a given meteorological regime. Our results suggest that smaller cloud droplet effective radii are related to higher required amounts of supercooling but that, overall, pollution plumes from fossil fuel combustion lower the degree of supercooling that is required for freezing by approximately 4 °C. The relationship between anthropogenic plumes and the freezing transition temperature from liquid to ice remains to be explained.
Plain Language Summary
Anthropogenic pollution plumes from midlatitudes can be transported long distances to the Arctic. In this study, we analyze the impact of these plumes on how easily liquid clouds over the Arctic Ocean freeze by using a novel combination of satellite measurements and a pollution transport model. We find that liquid clouds in polluted air switch phase to become ice clouds at temperatures that are 4 °C higher they would otherwise in pristine air. Because ice clouds in the Arctic precipitate more easily than liquid clouds, the potential is that distant industrial pollution sources are acting to reduce arctic cloud life time.
Couldn't resist comparing SMOS and 0m salinity.I used to be more agile with my animations, but can you or anyone compare SMOS to PIOMAS (from Wipneus' animation) for Oct 15th? If it's technically possible.
Bremen has 2018 lowest for this date.
https://seaice.uni-bremen.de/data/amsr2/today/extent_n_running_mean_amsr2_previous.png
not this late ona friday noght =Couldn't resist comparing SMOS and 0m salinity.I used to be more agile with my animations, but can you or anyone compare SMOS to PIOMAS (from Wipneus' animation) for Oct 15th? If it's technically possible.
October 15-19.Thanks as always for this animation.
Noticing that the DMI 80N temp (sorry A-Team) has been hovering vaguely around -10º C, I wonder if the observed (reported on these threads) 'sea water functionally doesn't freeze until the air reaches -10' meme is related (heat of formation and all that physical chemistry stuff that I don't know anything about).I have a vague memory that there was a study that suggested temps had to drop below -10 celsius for sea ice to form in the Arctic ocean. This has been repeated so often that it seems to have become the generally accepted conventional wisdom. I have my doubts.
in the long range forecast, (this is all the way out to November 4th) GFS expects increased Arctic heat anomalies. climate reanalyzer shows up to +5.8C in the Arctic zone. really pronounced warm Arctic with two colder regions on land. this is bigger than October of 2016 in terms of DMI 80N.
10mb center starts to move towards greenland as well.
I have a vague memory that there was a study that suggested temps had to drop below -10 celsius for sea ice to form in the Arctic ocean. This has been repeated so often that it seems to have become the generally accepted conventional wisdom. I have my doubts.
I can see no reason why in a calm sea, and with the sea having lost most of its accumulated summer heat, ice cannot form at air temperatures a bit below -1.8. There is ice forming here and there on the Arctic fringes, and I doubt everywhere is at -10 or below.
I am expecting to be shot down. But is the proof out there?
G, "I have my doubts." me too, here's Waynes post (http://eh2r.blogspot.com/2016/10/new-sea-ice-starts-from-3-important.html)Wayne's assertion that you must have hace -1.8C water and -11C surface temperatures is scientifically wrong. By thermodynamics, the water, the interface, and the air immediate to it must be at the same temperature. The other is alternative facts, or fake science, as bad as those that some deniers use to push fanatically or ignorantly or both their arguments.
G, "I have my doubts." me too, here's Waynes post (http://eh2r.blogspot.com/2016/10/new-sea-ice-starts-from-3-important.html)Wayne's post
New sea ice starts from 3 important concurring factors: -1.8 C water, little or no sea waves and colder than -11 C surface temperatures....
... there is an apparent thermal balance, where as, colder than -11 C surface air seems imperative for sea ice to form.WD October 4, 2016
The freezing temperature of ocean (saline) water is typically -1.8 degrees Celsius (28.7 degrees Fahrenheit). If the average daily temperature was -5.8 degrees Celsius (21.6 degrees Fahrenheit), this would be -4 degrees Celsius (24.8 degrees Fahrenheit) for one day, as the following equation shows:
(-1.8) - (-5.8) = 4 degrees below freezing
4 degrees below freezing, Day 1 = 4 cumulative FDD
7 degrees below freezing, Day 2 = 11 cumulative FDD
2 degrees above freezing, Day 3 = 9 cumulative FDD
Scientists have developed different formulas to estimate ice thickness from thermodynamic growth, using the FDD. One such formula (from Lebedev 1938) is:
Thickness (cm) = 1.33 * FDD (°C)0.58
The ice thickness increases at a rate roughly proportional to the square root of the cumulative FDD. Formulas such as this are empirical, meaning they are calculated only with observed data, so they really are simplifications of the ice growth processes. The formulas assume that the ice growth occurs in calm water and is reasonably consistent, and they do not take into account sea ice motion, snow cover, and other surface conditions.
Snow cover is one factor that dramatically alters the actual sea ice thickness calculated from the above formula. Snow is an effective insulator, slowing the transfer of heat from the ocean, through the ice, and to the atmosphere. Snow essentially slows the growth of ice.
Sensitivity of Caspian sea-ice to air temperature
Helen Tamura-Wicks a∗ Ralf Toumi a and W. Paul Budgell
Space and Atmospheric Physics Group, Imperial College London, UK
Institute of Marine Research, Bergen, Norway
Caspian sea ice concentration from satellite passive microwave data and surface
daily air temperatures are analysed from 1978 to 2009. Relationships between
mean winter air temperatures, cumulative freezing degree days (CFDD) and
the sum of daily ice area (cumulative ice area) are found. These show that
mean monthly air temperatures of less than 5.5 to 9.5◦C, and a minimum
CFDD of 3.6±11.2◦C, is required for ice formation in the Northern Caspian.
.... a study that suggested temps had to drop below -10 celsius for sea ice to form in the Arctic ocean. This has been repeated so often that it seems to have become the generally accepted conventional wisdom. I have my doubts.I quote from my post two days ago in this thread:
Gerontocrat, don't forget that when the topmost water surface is cooled it sinks, and ia replaced by warmer water below. This process is stopped when the watef is shallow, or when the surface flash-freezes into floating ice under a very low temperature. I think this is where the -10C or -7C air temps come from.Hence the caveats in NSIDCs little article containing the Lebedev formula. (Don't forget Snow)
Of course it also depends on the stillness of the water (which is why coastal ice appears more quickly) and on salinity (which is why areas which have recently melted can freeze much more easily).
Gerontocrat, don't forget that when the topmost water surface is cooled it sinks, and ia replaced by warmer water below. This process is stopped when the watef is shallow, or when the surface flash-freezes into floating ice under a very low temperature. I think this is where the -10C or -7C air temps come from.
Of course it also depends on the stillness of the water (which is why coastal ice appears more quickly) and on salinity (which is why areas which have recently melted can freeze much more easily).
-11C
QuoteNew sea ice starts from 3 important concurring factors: -1.8 C water, little or no sea waves and colder than -11 C surface temperatures....
... there is an apparent thermal balance, where as, colder than -11 C surface air seems
imperative for sea ice to form.WD October 4, 2016
So far -11 degrees for sea ice formation looks like a load of....
I'm grateful that Wayne took temperature measurements and photographs and posted them to add to the very limited 'on the ground' information available to us.The solar ray deflection measurements to determine ice thickness, plus those comments at Neven’s over the many years that have proven more often wrong than right? Like the predictions of summer wall-to-wall clear skies (the Big Blue or something like that) done during some recent years that ended with cloudest summers? Yes, yes, very valuable.
Sorry I like the guy, he seems nice and all and always responds to everyone very civic way, but he is at odds with established scientific facts, and one has to reject that from the outset.
I rather thought that I would be shot down, but it was worth it.There is an observation showing a correlation and if you can't think of a model to fit the data then it's probably your understanding that's a load and not the observation! Don't dismiss observations because you don't like them.QuoteNew sea ice starts from 3 important concurring factors: -1.8 C water, little or no sea waves and colder than -11 C surface temperatures....
... there is an apparent thermal balance, where as, colder than -11 C surface air seems
imperative for sea ice to form.WD October 4, 2016
So far -11 degrees for sea ice formation looks like a load of....
My guess is the water can't lose enough heat rapidly enough through cooling air. The cooling top layer of the ocean becomes dense and circulates as it loses heat. You end up with a pattern of insulating cold air and circulating water that warms as you circulate the top 100m of the ocean. Not conducive to forming ice.
I thought that it was that the IR loss of both the ocean and the atmosphere producing the correct conditions for ice formation. An under those conditions the atmosphere is -11C and the water at freezing point. The freezing water is going to make a lot of heat as ice forms.
The Russian scientist Vladamir Vize ( the island was called after him ) was the Godfather of ice formation. There is a rather scary looking picture of him here on Wiki !
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Wiese
Maybe earlier in the season temps close to -10 are needed to get things going but nilas will form with air temps at -7.
IIRC the recent thin new ice that formed in the western Beaufort temps were not much lower than -7 C (according to nullschool)
Im guessing you are reading from an undergraduate thermodynamics textbook and pretending to be an expert.This guess, I can tell you, is wrong. The rest is your opinion.
There are many, many things we don't know about the arctic. If you have a theory great! But don't call it "established scientific fact" unless you can point to undisputed peer reviewed journal articles that have established those facts through observational data.Ok, perhaps it is the way Wayne asserted that "surface temperature". Does he mean water surface? In which case I don't have to go to any peer-reviewed paper: the continuity of temperature across the interface of bodies on different states (solid-liquid-gas) is something I have measured in the lab, imposed as boundary conditions in the computational lab, and frankly I hope it is "common understanding" in this high-level educated forum.
DMI N 80 average temp hasn't dropped below -8C for about a month and a half longer than normal, which is a record.
sorry GSY but it was -9'C 4 weeks ago and - 10'C today
Next year the only thickish safeish ice will be just north of CAA. Greenland looks set to be the northern hemisphere's center of cold within a decade. Weird weird weather is coming ]
Little arguement tonight as it's below -40'C again over central Greenland . I warned friends as far away as S.Spain yesterday that that cold was headed Western Europe's way . Tonight I see 'Arctic cold' on the bbc long range forecast .. not strictly accurate ..
living as I do in N. Ireland I keep an eye on Greenland .. my big neighbour . I don't look forward to a planet with a tilted cap .. b.c.
Next year the only thickish safeish ice will be just north of CAA. Greenland looks set to be the northern hemisphere's center of cold within a decade. Weird weird weather is coming ]
We've got to try to be smart about these things... For all of us seeking a safe place for the collapse or extreme storms, We all understand that the North atlantic (where the cool pool meets the heat of Europe will be one of the most likely places for super storms. I'd thing the runnoff zone on the Western side down around Newfoundland would also be a big zone for storms and indeed up over greenland to whatever PAC is left N. of greenland. One Harvey sized rain bomb on the interior of greenland could flush the ice out to see SUPER fast!
As the last remaining cold spot, we can best assume GREENLAND will be under attack from LOWS constantly eating away at it. IF it was 30+C for over a month over britain this past year, I see no reason why such a High would not develop over Greenland... 90-F there for a month would be SHOCKING
For all of us seeking a safe place for the collapse or extreme storms...
living as I do in N. Ireland I keep an eye on Greenland .. my big neighbour . I don't look forward to a planet with a tilted cap .. b.c.It depends on how one perceives the world.
For all of us seeking a safe place for the collapse or extreme storms...
Every ecosystem will be ****ed. Mad Max dust storm terribleness most places.
October 9-21.Thanks Aluminium! The two ice growth areas towrds Siberia are interesting. Is there a reason they're located the way they are? A question for speculation at least for me.
Discuss collapse in the appropriate threads please!Well said, Ktb
The to-date arctic sea ice extent for 2007 is now the lowest extent, & 2007 is soon to be passed by 2016 sea ice low.....As stated above, to-date 2016 sea ice low established itself as the lowest of any satellite record to-date. However, while all other years gained more sea ice, 2018 Arctic sea ice tiny gains are presently pacing with 2016 & even a trace lower, right now. In the weeks ahead tho, are 2016's wide & record lows & even sea ice LOSSES, during periods of dramatic sea ice gains. It just seems tough to see, that 2018 can continue to track with 2016, without even more warmth pouring into the High Arctic. Present short term predictions seem to indicate that cold sliding off the Greenland Ice Sheet (with some help from Canadian archipelago?) should direct itself deeper into the High Arctic & blunt any possibility of great increases in 2018 High Arctic heat, which are already 8degC over average.
With all this sea ice... "decrease of the increase", it will be very interesting to see what the to-date sea ice extent of 2018 will bring in these future weeks, since to-date 2018 sea ice extent is rivaling 2012, 2007, & 2016, & a "long term" 2018 High Arctic high temperature is presently reigning.
Do you have a graph of the previous years, rather than just some average line?You can watch every single year here: http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php
The DMI 80N temperature (http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php)is currently just about where it was this time the past 3 years, within a few days or a few degrees.
I am with A-team(?) on the over reliance on temperatures North of 80 from DMI. Being such a small proportion of the Arctic Ocean is one thing, another is that it can be downright misleading.
Does anyone know which area Climate Reanalyzer uses when it comes to "2m Temperature Anomaly" in the Arctic (e.g. today it is +3,1 °C)?
Temperature Anomaly Maps
The variable Temperature 2m Anomaly is available for the GFS model. Temperature anomaly (at 2 meters above the surface) refers to the departure of the current forecasted temperature from a climate baseline. Climate Reanalyzer uses a 1979-2000 climate baseline derived from the reanalysis of the NCEP Climate Forecast System (CFSR/CFSV2). This baseline is chosen over the more typical 1981-2010 climate normal for the simple reason that it better approximates historical climatology, as shown here in relation to a 1880-2014 global land-ocean temperature index from NASA GISS.
GFS temperature anomaly maps for the World, Arctic, and Antarctic display at the right of the image a list of area-weighted average anomaly values for the World, Northern Hemisphere (Eq-90°N), Southern Hemisphere (Eq-90°S), Arctic (65°N-90°N), Antarctic (65°S-90°S), and Tropics (25°S-25°N).
I so wish Tealight aka Nico Sun did estimates of FDDs for the Arctic Ocean as a whole, or even better sea by sea as he does for Albedo warming potential. All I want for Xmas is a....
I so wish Tealight aka Nico Sun did estimates of FDDs for the Arctic Ocean as a whole, or even better sea by sea as he does for Albedo warming potential. All I want for Xmas is a....
I think he wants it as well, but he has only a limited amount of time and if he does a new gridded FDD analysis it will be a full FDD map of the Arctic and not just a few new graphs.
Currently he is busy with a daily & year-round combined Albedo Warming Potential for Land & Ocean (see map below)
The data is only available since 1997 and he doesn't have a regional breakdown yet for this projection.
Looks like the Byam Martin Channel (http://uphere.ca/sites/default/files/page-35-map.jpg) is still moving.Yes, though probably not for long, and the Nares.
In the summer, we'd have called such temp anomalies a blow torch and I don't remember a one... Now we have a month long blow torch. 2016 was jaw dropping as it was
In the summer, we'd have called such temp anomalies a blow torch and I don't remember a one... Now we have a month long blow torch. 2016 was jaw dropping as it wasNot sure blow torch really applies in winter (if ever). Low power defroster maybe?
.....2018 Arctic sea ice tiny (extent) gains are presently pacing with 2016 & even a trace lower, right now. .... It just seems tough to see, that 2018 can continue to track with 2016, without even more warmth pouring into the High Arctic......which are already 8degC over average.It appears that 2018 Arctic sea ice VOLUME echoes the present lack of strong gains of sea ice extent.
In the summer, we'd have called such temp anomalies a blow torch and I don't remember a one... Now we have a month long blow torch. 2016 was jaw dropping as it was
2018 is joining a group of catastrophic years in the Arctic, 2007, 2012, 2016, although I fear it will be overshadowed by 2019 with this setup.
Not the same, WACC is only for cold seasons, Equable climate for the whole year, not that it matters much. Equable climate is if Greenland has melted away, which it is very much trying to do. Well semantic difference maybe.In the summer, we'd have called such temp anomalies a blow torch and I don't remember a one... Now we have a month long blow torch. 2016 was jaw dropping as it was
Equable climate, WACC...same thing.
Not the same, WACC is only for cold seasons, Equable climate for the whole year, not that it matters much. Equable climate is if Greenland has melted away, which it is very much trying to do. Well semantic difference maybe.In the summer, we'd have called such temp anomalies a blow torch and I don't remember a one... Now we have a month long blow torch. 2016 was jaw dropping as it was
Equable climate, WACC...same thing.
Yes. We'll soon see if higher sea surface salinity makes a difference this year. 2016 still had some open water north of Severnaya Zemlya on this date, but ice had already reached FJL.
And it typically freezes very quickly, being shallow and dominated by freshwater input from the Siberian rivers. It's rate of freeze is going to be interesting to watch.
The only part of the laptev that's freezing is the distant borders with the central arctic ocean? I didn't see any ice along the cost.I think you're looking at the right thing, just it is not an image, it's 4-day animation GIF, you have to click on it, to see progress during that period
Maybe I'm looking at the wrong image?
The only part of the laptev that's freezing is the distant borders with the central arctic ocean? I didn't see any ice along the cost.I think you're looking at the right thing, just it is not an image, it's 4-day animation GIF, you have to click on it, to see progress during that period
Maybe I'm looking at the wrong image?
....2018 Arctic sea ice tiny gains are presently pacing with 2016 & even a trace lower, right now. In the weeks ahead tho, are 2016's wide & record lows & even sea ice LOSSES, during periods of dramatic sea ice gains. It just seems tough to see, that 2018 can continue to track with 2016......Just a few days later & already 2018 Arctic sea ice extent has risen 130,000 square kilometers more than 2016. Unless the Greenland Ice Sheet cold stops sliding off Greenland into the High Arctic, which is beginning to repress anomalously high High Arctic temperatures, to-date 2016 Arctic sea ice should dramatically continue as the lowest extent at this time of year, of any satellite year.
The top 2 images in the first animation are from the Mercator Ocean model, salinity at 0m and 34m. The bottom three are based on satellite data. Uni-Bremen SMOS, Uni-Hamburg AMSR2 and JAXA RGB. Oct1-20 is a little early to include SMOS so colours around the pole hole aren't an indication of ice thickness. Animation runs from oct1-23, ~8MB. (click on the image to run)
All the images are fixed scale but they 'dither' after conversion to gif in this case.
I wonder if the Atlantification we are seeing in the Barents and southern Arctic has started to breakdown the pycnocline in the Laptev part of the Eurasian Basin.
Quote from: RoxTheGeologist
I wonder if the Atlantification we are seeing in the Barents and southern Arctic has started to breakdown the pycnocline in the Laptev part of the Eurasian Basin.
Google, Igor V. Polyakov. He has a couple of recent papers I think you will find interesting. I can't link them because I'm on a phone, but they are open access.
His papers won't answer all of your questions, but they are very interesting.
October 21-25.I have read here in the past how ice must grow from the coast or adjacent to existing ice, therefore once we get a blue ocean situation the refreeze might be very delayed (if at all). This animation is a fine example of how given enough cold temps over enough time the surface of open water will freeze even when not adjacent to any coast or other ice.
October 21-25.I have read here in the past how ice must grow from the coast or adjacent to existing ice, therefore once we get a blue ocean situation the refreeze might be very delayed (if at all). This animation is a fine example of how given enough cold temps over enough time the surface of open water will freeze even when not adjacent to any coast or other ice.
This should probably go in the Arctic Background thread, but it is freezing season news so....
This should probably go in the Arctic Background thread, but it is freezing season news so....Egad. That video was filmed in *2006*!
Yesterday I had the wondrously unexpected pleasure of meeting Sir Wally Herbert (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wally_Herbert)'s wife, daughter and granddaughter:
Egad. That video was filmed in *2006*!
From Rick Thoman:I guess the CAA might show a similar story. But as regards area, there has been a hiccup in the last two days for both the Beaufort and CAA - area in reverse gear.
"Beaufort Sea is now largely iced-up. The area with >15% ice cover reached 95% of the basin area on Oct 23 (@NSIDC data), making this the earliest "ice-over" of the Beaufort since 2002".
The 40-year trend of ice-over date tells a different story. Trend is showing the Beaufort is icing over about 1 month later than it did circa 1980.
From Rick Thoman:I guess the CAA might show a similar story. But as regards area, there has been a hiccup in the last two days for both the Beaufort and CAA - area in reverse gear.
"Beaufort Sea is now largely iced-up. The area with >15% ice cover reached 95% of the basin area on Oct 23 (@NSIDC data), making this the earliest "ice-over" of the Beaufort since 2002".
The 40-year trend of ice-over date tells a different story. Trend is showing the Beaufort is icing over about 1 month later than it did circa 1980.
Despite relatively high +ve temp anomalies on the Russian side and the Pacific entrance, 3 seas are continuing to rapidly gain ice, while Kara may be about to join them.The North Atlantic Drift should restrengthen to prevent ice formation up there in the darkness to get a BOE for the whole year. This is a bit more complicated situation than some frozen pool in the river run, but not by much. If the pool is small enough the upstream rushing waters may keep it open for quite long into the winter. Thus I've imagined the remnant ice in the CAB would start to rotate quite quickly before a BOE can happen. Well maybe on the same year, so no predictive value here either.
As the Arctic scorches... the only explanation for the attached is albedo, IMO.Greenland scientist, Jason Box, has said it has to do with the wavy jet-stream - due to climate-change.
Always interesting to look through those 5 day progressions from Aluminium and observe the areas where ice is developing swiftly and where it is not.
The Laptev is closing in but still we have an area that is still north of 80 ( at circa 80 N 140 E ) that has developed very little since ice minimum. Is this the same area where we have seen early opening/polynya before in the Spring ? Was there suspicion that this section of the Arctic is prone to warm upwewlling and difficult to freeze ?
Always interesting to look through those 5 day progressions from Aluminium and observe the areas where ice is developing swiftly and where it is not.
The Laptev is closing in but still we have an area that is still north of 80 ( at circa 80 N 140 E ) that has developed very little since ice minimum. Is this the same area where we have seen early opening/polynya before in the Spring ? Was there suspicion that this section of the Arctic is prone to warm upwewlling and difficult to freeze ?
Always interesting to look through those 5 day progressions from Aluminium and observe the areas where ice is developing swiftly and where it is not.
The Laptev is closing in but still we have an area that is still north of 80 ( at circa 80 N 140 E ) that has developed very little since ice minimum. Is this the same area where we have seen early opening/polynya before in the Spring ? Was there suspicion that this section of the Arctic is prone to warm upwewlling and difficult to freeze ?
If you look at the post uniquorn has been making, on the Salinity incursions, it suggests that Atlanticifaction of the Svalbard - FJL - Severnaya Zemlya slope may have reached the most south west end of the Eurasian basin. The open water is over the deeper shallows and may be warmer Atlantic waters shoaling over the shelf extension of the Lomonosov Ridge
litesong; October 25, 2018, 02:04:15 AMYesterday, to-date 2018 Arctic sea ice extent jumped to 700,000 square kilometers more than 2016. Today, for the first time in 5(?) days, 2018 Arctic sea ice only maintained its excess extent to 2016, still at 700,000 square kilometers.
......to-date 2018 Arctic sea ice extent has jumped to 440,000 square kilometers more than 2016. The 2018 sea ice rise has even passed the 2012, so 2018 is already in to-date 3rd place lowest sea ice.
As stated in earlier posts, cold sliding off the Greenland Ice Sheet & then proceeding into the High Arctic is reducing heat in the High Arctic, allowing increasing Arctic sea ice to form. I had NOT expected to-date 2018 sea ice to keep up with the record 2016 low sea ice. & the record high temperature anomalies of 2016 High Arctic are still ahead.
/////////
A day later, to-date 2018 Arctic sea ice extent has jumped to 560,000 square kilometers more than 2016.
Yesterday, to-date 2018 Arctic sea ice extent jumped to 700,000 square kilometers more than 2016. Today, for the first time in 5(?) days, 2018 Arctic sea ice only maintained its excess extent to 2016, still at 700,000 square kilometers.To-date 2018 Arctic sea ice extent jumped to 820,000 square kilometers more than 2016. During this yearly period of general strong sea ice gains, 2016 sea ice extent LOSSES are still in the calendar days ahead.
Oooops. Comment by bbr2314 that I was replying to has disappeared.
I did say 11/15 for Hudson Bay and it isn't holding out well, unless, you mean the Hudson River. Foxe Basin is almost completely iced and I think we are on track for 50-75% coverage in HB by 11/15 (my prediction was 75%).Oooops. Comment by bbr2314 that I was replying to has disappeared.
this reminds me of asking some users who predicted the hudson would be frozen by the 15th of november still believe so?
i for my part don't believe that and think that hudson is holding out quite well. during summer there were repeated theories of very early refreeze of hudson and even more extreme predictions for greater parts of canada.
i personally do not believe in any wide spread re-glacification, after all the globe is warming and sooner or later retreat of the ice will happen everywhere.
I did say 11/15 for Hudson Bay and it isn't holding out well, unless, you mean the Hudson River. Foxe Basin is almost completely iced and I think we are on track for 50-75% coverage in HB by 11/15 (my prediction was 75%).I think we are not on track for either 75% or 50% coverage of HB by 11/15. I think we will get there on 12/1, following the usual pattern.
CAA is frozen earlier than ever and HB will do the same. So why don't you go bother looking at some graphs
I did say 11/15 for Hudson Bay and it isn't holding out well, unless, you mean the Hudson River. Foxe Basin is almost completely iced and I think we are on track for 50-75% coverage in HB by 11/15 (my prediction was 75%).I think we are not on track for either 75% or 50% coverage of HB by 11/15. I think we will get there on 12/1, following the usual pattern.
CAA is frozen earlier than ever and HB will do the same. So why don't you go bother looking at some graphs
Hudson refreeze should be mostly complete by 11/15.
Officially have decent amount of second year ice that will survive in Foxe Basin. Refreeze now underway and should be mostly done in 10-14 days IMO. Very early / at that time the NRN reaches of HB should also begin to freeze.
There is growing consensus for PV displacement into Canada / HB.
Oscar headed for the polar cell as extratropical cyclone. GFS responds appropriately.Is there even a name for such tro-polar cyclones?
There is growing consensus for PV displacement into Canada / HB.
Consensus by whom?
Can someone help me understand why we should care that much about Hudson Bay, and whether it might freeze over a little earlier than normal?
David,I think besides ^^^, the dichotomy between Hudson and Bering / Barentz (Hudson freezing earlier than either of those two seas) also results / encourages more -500MB anomalies in HB and +500MB anomalies in Bering/Barentz, further worseing their ongoing transition to ice-free. (e.g., the "cold" that used to be located over Bering and Barentz in December is now instead over both HB + Canada and Siberia).
In addition to Dharma's reply, BBR thinks there is (or is imminently) advancing glaciation in parts of northern Canada (largely associated with apparently un-melted snow this past melting season). I'm sure Hudson Bay plays a role in his theory.
please don't drag this reglaciation debate into every single thread on the forum
where has the cold that used to be over Canada and Siberia gone if it has been replaced by the cold that was over Bering/Barnetz ? b.c.As the above images show, it is still there, and now much more severe. It hasn't been "replaced" it has been intensified.
A few stats regarding Hudson's bay. The following site is related to Polar bear migration but has some interesting stats on freeze up. It's about last years freeze but has a fair bit of historical stats from Environment Canada.There seem to be several seas in the Arctic which seem to be pretty much ignoring AGW and sea ice decline. 3 of them are the CAA, Baffin and Hudson Bay. Changes since 1979 are marginal in contrast with many other seas (- even the Central Arctic Sea) as the attached graphs seem to illustrate (which track the increase in open water over the years).
https://polarbearscience.com/2017/11/13/w-hudson-bay-freeze-up-one-of-earliest-since-1979-not-closer-to-average/
Below, Hudson Bay sea ice coverage for the week of 26 November, 1971-2016 (CIS) shows that 1971 and 1981 were also years of late freeze-up along the coast of western Hudson Bay (although some years known to have had late freeze-up (e.g. 1983, Ramsay and Stirling 1988) show higher values than expected, likely reflecting ice coverage in the northern portion of the bay rather than along the west coast near Churchill):
Yeah but the D10 supports my pet theory occasionally so I get excited and start slinging predictions that I will defend against all comers and derail every conversation instead of keeping a cool head and doing the work. I'm new here, but am I doing it right?
These might indeed be seen ignoring the AGW for three different reasons. Hudson has always been only 1st year ice, Baffin depends on the export volume that has possibly increased in the pace of general decline and CAA is the garlic press for oldest surviving ice taking over a year to melt.
There seem to be several seas in the Arctic which seem to be pretty much ignoring AGW and sea ice decline. 3 of them are the CAA, Baffin and Hudson Bay. Changes since 1979 are marginal in contrast with many other seas (- even the Central Arctic Sea) as the attached graphs seem to illustrate (which track the increase in open water over the years).
Oscar headed for the polar cell as extratropical cyclone. GFS responds appropriately.That will be a huge heat injection into NW Europe and potentially the Barents.
Oscar headed for the polar cell as extratropical cyclone. GFS responds appropriately.That will be a huge heat injection into NW Europe and potentially the Barents.
October 29 - November 2.
Yesterday, to-date 2018 Arctic sea ice extent jumped to 910,000 square kilometers more than 2016. Today, to-date 2018 Arctic sea ice extent jumped to 1 million square kilometers more than 2016.
October 29 - November 2.Ah, Laptev freezes inwards. Great animation. Thanks again
To-date 2018 Arctic sea ice extent is 1.12 million square kilometers MORE than 2016! Now, 2018 also has MORE sea ice extent than the average of the 2010's, despite very warm High Arctic temperatures since direct solar radiation disappeared from the Arctic.Yesterday, to-date 2018 Arctic sea ice extent jumped to 910,000 square kilometers more than 2016. Today, to-date 2018 Arctic sea ice extent jumped to 1 million square kilometers more than 2016.
To-date 2018 Arctic sea ice extent is a total 1.05 million square kilometers more than 2016! Now, 2018 is even approaching the sea ice extent average of the 2010's, despite High Arctic temperatures leaping to 10degC above average.
To-date 2018 Arctic sea ice extent is 1.12 million square kilometers MORE than 2016! Now, 2018 also has MORE sea ice extent than the average of the 2010's, despite very warm High Arctic temperatures since direct solar radiation disappeared from the Arctic.
We have the extent and area thread for this kind of info. This thread is for discussing what is causing the numbers to fluctuate...... which I have delineated several times, while posting these shifting, rising & falling sea ice extents.
...
The polar vortex has plunged into Canada, and by D5, it should be sitting over Hudson Bay.
...
Maybe it is just "a" polar vortex. Or an extremely frigid airmass. Perhaps I was incorrect in terminology but my point stands (apologies!)...
The polar vortex has plunged into Canada, and by D5, it should be sitting over Hudson Bay.
...
Am I looking at the wrong thing? The polar vortex? Looks like its over Svalbard on Day 5 and the rest of the forecast has it settling down over Greenland after the wave of Oscar smacks it around a bit.
https://imgur.com/a/Z1L8w4T
gif of 11 day forecast shows it centering on the other side of Greenland from Hudson Bay. Hudson Bay? Am I looking at the polar vortex temperature and heights at 10mb or have I got it wrong?
I just don't see it in the forecast. To me it looks like the PV at any level is displaced, and the timing is coincident with the influence of an extratropical cyclone entering the arctic. As the GFS outlook has evolved, the PV moves away from the north pole toward Svalbard and Siberia, but quickly recovers around Nov 15
I wouldn't predict necessarily but it seems to indicate milder weather mid-month for the Eastern US and Canada.
Great, now we are up to 11-day forecasts. Silly me, I didn't even know they existed.They are ensemble forecasts (used for long-range) and it was a direct refutation of the idea it would be warm mid-month... all the models show otherwise. Do you know what ensemble means?
yeah it gets cold because of a trough. the polar vortex is not really a ground level phenomenon. saying the polar vortex is centered over hudson bay is just wrong. that's a trough.Is it just a trough though? Modeling has it cut off completely as riding builds overhead. I think it is a secondary PV. But again, I am possibly wrong. I just know modeling shows it getting frigid.
after the (perhaps I should specify) stratospheric polar vortex settles down, as forecast, it would tend to indicate milder conditions. granted, somewhat after mid-month.
not all cold is "polar vortex" although that's how it gets used in the popular vernacular ever since that one PV split in like Nov 2014
yeah it gets cold because of a trough. the polar vortex is not really a ground level phenomenon. saying the polar vortex is centered over hudson bay is just wrong. that's a trough.
after the (perhaps I should specify) stratospheric polar vortex settles down, as forecast, it would tend to indicate milder conditions. granted, somewhat after mid-month.
not all cold is "polar vortex" although that's how it gets used in the popular vernacular ever since that one PV split in like Nov 2014
Superior has been cold compared to the last several years, but rate of cooling slowed down a lot around mid-October.Thank you for that graph! I don't think it will stay entirely frozen into June but some ice may remain. In 2015, ice lasted well into May (and June, I think?)
I doubt highly Superior will stay frozen until June.
The question is whether the refreeze will remain rapid, or slow down now as things have filled up now and the ice edge gets closer to the Pacific and Atlantic. My guess is the latter, but you never know.
The question is whether the refreeze will remain rapid, or slow down now as things have filled up now and the ice edge gets closer to the Pacific and Atlantic. My guess is the latter, but you never know.
GFS about 3 days out is showing blooms of heat rolling into the Arctic from both sides of the basin, and an outbreak of cold air across the Canadian shield just east of the Rockies, and a matching breakout of cold air (it appears) into central Siberia across the eastern Barents....
The polar vortex has plunged into Canada, and by D5, it should be sitting over Hudson Bay.
...
Am I looking at the wrong thing? The polar vortex? Looks like its over Svalbard on Day 5 and the rest of the forecast has it settling down over Greenland after the wave of Oscar smacks it around a bit.
https://imgur.com/a/Z1L8w4T
gif of 11 day forecast shows it centering on the other side of Greenland from Hudson Bay. Hudson Bay? Am I looking at the polar vortex temperature and heights at 10mb or have I got it wrong?
I did say 11/15 for Hudson Bay and it isn't holding out well, unless, you mean the Hudson River. Foxe Basin is almost completely iced and I think we are on track for 50-75% coverage in HB by 11/15 (my prediction was 75%).Oooops. Comment by bbr2314 that I was replying to has disappeared.
this reminds me of asking some users who predicted the hudson would be frozen by the 15th of november still believe so?
i for my part don't believe that and think that hudson is holding out quite well. during summer there were repeated theories of very early refreeze of hudson and even more extreme predictions for greater parts of canada.
i personally do not believe in any wide spread re-glacification, after all the globe is warming and sooner or later retreat of the ice will happen everywhere.
CAA is frozen earlier than ever and HB will do the same. So why don't you go bother looking at some graphs before launching into a random attack on me?
Also, SH: I deleted post regarding GB because the cold air went down into North America this wrong, and not Europe. 500MB was a bit deceiving, oops.
I did say 11/15 for Hudson Bay and it isn't holding out well, unless, you mean the Hudson River. Foxe Basin is almost completely iced and I think we are on track for 50-75% coverage in HB by 11/15 (my prediction was 75%).
Will dismissed by many earlier as unlikely, this prediction is looking more likely by the day.
Foxe is almost completely iced, Hudson will follow rapidly. If not 11/15, 11/20.I did say 11/15 for Hudson Bay and it isn't holding out well, unless, you mean the Hudson River. Foxe Basin is almost completely iced and I think we are on track for 50-75% coverage in HB by 11/15 (my prediction was 75%).
Will dismissed by many earlier as unlikely, this prediction is looking more likely by the day.
Well isn't looking any more likely now than then. Hudson is less than 10% frozen at the moment, and Foxe Basin is still around 50% (and thus far from "completely iced").
yeah it gets cold because of a trough. the polar vortex is not really a ground level phenomenon. saying the polar vortex is centered over hudson bay is just wrong. that's a trough.Is it just a trough though? Modeling has it cut off completely as riding builds overhead. I think it is a secondary PV. But again, I am possibly wrong. I just know modeling shows it getting frigid.
after the (perhaps I should specify) stratospheric polar vortex settles down, as forecast, it would tend to indicate milder conditions. granted, somewhat after mid-month.
not all cold is "polar vortex" although that's how it gets used in the popular vernacular ever since that one PV split in like Nov 2014
One additional note: the Great Lakes are frigid compared to normal, and the last two years. I think they will freeze completely and thoroughly this year with melt-out delayed til May and June in Superior and Huron.
https://www.glerl.noaa.gov/res/glcfs/compare_years/
11/3/2018 vs. 11/3/2016:
Superior: whole volume, -1.8F, surface, -3.8F
Michigan: whole volume, -3.1F, surface, -4.2F
Huron: whole volume, -2.6F, surface, -3.8F
Erie: whole volume, -4.6F, surface, -5.1F
Ontario: whole volume, -2.6F, surface, -3.4F
I would think that the combination of the cold in HB / GL (both residuals of this frigid spring and late melt), are additional indicators for a very severe winter in the US & Canadian East. Superior is probably going to freeze VERY solidly.
I think it is a tropospheric PV as the other poster mentioned before. Cut-off lows do not generate their own cold air, and are "dying" cold airmasses without a sufficient source -- PVs are the opposite (at least, I think this is what differentiates the two, or at least it is what differentiates them in my mind).yeah it gets cold because of a trough. the polar vortex is not really a ground level phenomenon. saying the polar vortex is centered over hudson bay is just wrong. that's a trough.Is it just a trough though? Modeling has it cut off completely as riding builds overhead. I think it is a secondary PV. But again, I am possibly wrong. I just know modeling shows it getting frigid.
after the (perhaps I should specify) stratospheric polar vortex settles down, as forecast, it would tend to indicate milder conditions. granted, somewhat after mid-month.
not all cold is "polar vortex" although that's how it gets used in the popular vernacular ever since that one PV split in like Nov 2014
Which would make it a cut-off low if this is the case and, yes, you are wrong IMHO.One additional note: the Great Lakes are frigid compared to normal, and the last two years. I think they will freeze completely and thoroughly this year with melt-out delayed til May and June in Superior and Huron.
https://www.glerl.noaa.gov/res/glcfs/compare_years/
11/3/2018 vs. 11/3/2016:
Superior: whole volume, -1.8F, surface, -3.8F
Michigan: whole volume, -3.1F, surface, -4.2F
Huron: whole volume, -2.6F, surface, -3.8F
Erie: whole volume, -4.6F, surface, -5.1F
Ontario: whole volume, -2.6F, surface, -3.4F
I would think that the combination of the cold in HB / GL (both residuals of this frigid spring and late melt), are additional indicators for a very severe winter in the US & Canadian East. Superior is probably going to freeze VERY solidly.
While I understand you are referring to water temperature anomalies, it would be helpful if you would be more specific in calling these temperatures out as such so as not to mislead the reader.
Here are the actual surface temperatures for the Great Lakes. Hardly frigid.
A complete icing over of Lake Superior is not unprecedented, happening most recently in 2015. Ice cover on the Great Lakes is highly variable year over year so predicting a complete icing over this winter is a little like betting on the toss of a dice. If it were to ice over, this does not presage a coming ice age.I didn't say it did? I think the momentum is significant here though, and that later melt / earlier freeze limits summer insolation uptake. Factors can override this of course, but in itself it is yet another feedback, however minor. And, crucial to this thread, I think the Great Lakes will contribute to ice totals in a greater capacity than normal (again, however relatively minor vs. everything else).
https://www.glerl.noaa.gov/data/ice/historicalAnim/
A complete icing over of Lake Superior is not unprecedented, happening most recently in 2015. Ice cover on the Great Lakes is highly variable year over year so predicting a complete icing over this winter is a little like betting on the toss of a dice. If it were to ice over, this does not presage a coming ice age.I didn't say it did? I think the momentum is significant here though, and that later melt / earlier freeze limits summer insolation uptake. Factors can override this of course, but in itself it is yet another feedback, however minor. And, crucial to this thread, I think the Great Lakes will contribute to ice totals in a greater capacity than normal (again, however relatively minor vs. everything else).
https://www.glerl.noaa.gov/data/ice/historicalAnim/
If it were to ice over, this does not presage a coming ice age.
I didn't say it did?
No problem. :)If it were to ice over, this does not presage a coming ice age.
I didn't say it did?
No, you didn't but, given your predilection for pushing this theory on multiple threads, you should understand why I said this.
This is losing its utility.You do realize the projected upcoming pattern is almost identical to 11/2014?
and the polar vortex isn't a ground level feature. not all cold is a polar vortex. maybe that's how it's used in the common vernacular, but meteorologists and climatologists have been correcting that usage since at least November of 2014 when the actual polar vortex split and the term garnered widespread attention.
Any analysis of polar vortex is done at 70mb, 50mb, or 10mb. If you wanna call all arctic air the polar vortex, that's going to confuse the structural feature with surface phenomenon.
Sure, the PV winds are prevalent down to 350 mb, 500 mb, whatever. it's not the winds at the ground level.
and I'll take my answer logged off.
October 31 - November 4.Thanks for the animations. Beaufort ice looks quite solid on amsr2. A bit more fractured on worldview and polarview, oct5th (Amundsen gulf, bottom left) https://tinyurl.com/y9ca4f9w
This is losing its utility.*Thank you* sark.
and the polar vortex isn't a ground level feature. not all cold is a polar vortex...
A complete icing over of Lake Superior is not unprecedented, happening most recently in 2015. Ice cover on the Great Lakes is highly variable year over year so predicting a complete icing over this winter is a little like betting on the toss of a dice. If it were to ice over, this does not presage a coming ice age.The animation is wonderful! Thank you.
https://www.glerl.noaa.gov/data/ice/historicalAnim/
bbr, do anyone a favor and google "polar vortex"You are rude. There is a PV entering Canada. You can insult me all you want but it won't change the fact it is going to be frigid in Canada and that a PV is relocating to Hudson Bay / Foxe Basin. But keep insulting me! :)
I'm not going to waste my time arguing with inexperienced people who post prodigious amounts of nonsense supporting some crank pet theory they carry as a preconceived notion. I don't see you doing the work, just wasting everyone's time with your fantasizing and belief. The endless stream of predictions and the seeming lack of awareness of basic meteorology, all the drama and accusations, it tells me everything about your personality and nothing about the conditions in the Arctic.
I don't care about your personality or your crank pet theories, at all. Nobody cares about mine. I'm not here to pretend I'm some prodigy oracle of futurecasting. Take that trash to YouTube, you've got enough to set up a successful channel there.
if a guy like me can see through this crap, then this forum is no more valuable than YouTube cranks, Guy McPherson, and other disinformation spewing attention whores who have no intention of doing the hard work of science.
I'm done with it.
bbr
I don't read your posts. I don't read the endless debate about your pet theory. I don't care. It's not good information.
Foxe is almost completely iced, Hudson will follow rapidly. If not 11/15, 11/20.
Well isn't looking any more likely now than then. Hudson is less than 10% frozen at the moment, and Foxe Basin is still around 50% (and thus far from "completely iced").
bbrJust put him on ignore - makes this forum more readable. IDK why they're still here, honestly.
I don't read your posts. I don't read the endless debate about your pet theory. I don't care. It's not good information.
That would still produce significant turbulence because of pressure backing up behind it. The warmer more saline flows at depth may *be* as much as 500m thick and even if not, their laminar flow could be seriously disrupted.
That's interesting! Lets see if it stays. It's over a high spot of the Yermak Plateau. But that plateau is 500m deep.
November 2-6.Chukchi starts to freeze later than Kara ( always forget the correct spelling of Tšuktsi) like the habit has been in recent years. Now the freezing should slow down to form the early winter Atlantic front somewhere on Kara. Interesting to see for how long ChucHi and Bering stay open,.
Since the Beaufort, CAB, ESS, Laptev is pretty much ice covered now, here is amsr2-uhh for the current freezing season, sep24-nov6I expect the Laptev closing will mean the recent gallop of century+ extent increases will drop off, and 2018 may start pushing against the previous lows for date again. The Kara refreeze may make up for some of that, but after that, the Chukchi and Barents between them have an awful lot of heat to dissipate.
Don't forget Hudson's impending rapid ice up. But Chukchi, Barents, and Bering are going to result in a veryyyyy long stall afterwards, IMO. Baffin and Kara will be the only areas gaining.Since the Beaufort, CAB, ESS, Laptev is pretty much ice covered now, here is amsr2-uhh for the current freezing season, sep24-nov6I expect the Laptev closing will mean the recent gallop of century+ extent increases will drop off, and 2018 may start pushing against the previous lows for date again. The Kara refreeze may make up for some of that, but after that, the Chukchi and Barents between them have an awful lot of heat to dissipate.
bbr2314, when you post forecast maps, please indicate how many days out it is. For most people it isn't clear and they may think it's going to happen in the next few days, whereas with you it's mostly D8-10. Thanks.Will do! :)
Since the Beaufort, CAB, ESS, Laptev is pretty much ice covered now, here is amsr2-uhh for the current freezing season, sep24-nov6I expect the Laptev closing will mean the recent gallop of century+ extent increases will drop off, and 2018 may start pushing against the previous lows for date again. The Kara refreeze may make up for some of that, but after that, the Chukchi and Barents between them have an awful lot of heat to dissipate.
Maybe yes, maybe no.Since the Beaufort, CAB, ESS, Laptev is pretty much ice covered now, here is amsr2-uhh for the current freezing season, sep24-nov6I expect the Laptev closing will mean the recent gallop of century+ extent increases will drop off, and 2018 may start pushing against the previous lows for date again. The Kara refreeze may make up for some of that, but after that, the Chukchi and Barents between them have an awful lot of heat to dissipate.
From what I have read here you will find a strong consensus on this forum agreeing with you. It's going to be an interesting freeze season.
Conundrums;Maybe yes, maybe no.Since the Beaufort, CAB, ESS, Laptev is pretty much ice covered now, here is amsr2-uhh for the current freezing season, sep24-nov6I expect the Laptev closing will mean the recent gallop of century+ extent increases will drop off, and 2018 may start pushing against the previous lows for date again. The Kara refreeze may make up for some of that, but after that, the Chukchi and Barents between them have an awful lot of heat to dissipate.
From what I have read here you will find a strong consensus on this forum agreeing with you. It's going to be an interesting freeze season.
After a brief 3 days of low extent gains, JAXA extent gain for 8 Nov was 100k, 40 k above average.
Arctic temp anomalies dropping according to GFS - from nearly +3 to about +1 celsius within 5 days. But in the other hand the low average anomalies are countered by higher anomalies along the Atlantic front and in the Pacific gateway (reflecting SST +ve anomalies?).
Even with lower temps, more ice equals slower loss of residual summer heat accumulation.
Even with lower temps, more ice equals slower loss of residual summer heat accumulation.
Even with lower temps, more ice equals slower loss of residual summer heat accumulation.
I recently quoted you on this point you made last year when early freezing occurred rapidly. However, this year I drew a different conclusion: in 2018 the refreeze was the slowest on record, which gave the arctic more time to release ocean heat into the atmosphere. Therefore, the current faster trend of ice formation is consistent with less heat remaining in the water (even though air temps are currently above average).
A guy at NASA just came out with a report saying we will have unusually cold weather starting in about 6 weeks because of persistent lack of sunspot activity. This low has been predicted for years and we’ll see how it affects earth temperatures. Who know but maybe we will get heavy freezing this year over the arctic and see a much needed recovery to ice such as we haven’t seen for decades.
If there is to be such a recovery we need two things: very strong and persistent ice formation this freezing season and cool 2019 with slow ice melt to preserve ice going into next year’s freeze.
I agree, but it will take some really extreme weather to have the ice return to 2005-2006 levels. And when sunspots eventually go up again (assuming this short-term forcing negates all of long-term AGW), ice will melt with a vengeance.
FTB, I wouldn't hold ny hopes too high. I'm not sure what the new report is, but this subject has been discussed in a thread titled "Sunspot activity as a proxy for TSI".FTB is making stuff up, SSTs are still at record highs in most of the High Arctic and the + gains in 2018 are due to early refreeze of Foxe, Baffin, and HB. Whenever someone says "but solar!" it is cause for automatic dismissal as it means they are a denier.
FTB, I wouldn't hold ny hopes too high. I'm not sure what the new report is, but this subject has been discussed in a thread titled "Sunspot activity as a proxy for TSI".SSTs are still at record highs in most of the High Arctic and the + gains in 2018 are due to early refreeze of Foxe, Baffin, and HB. .
FTB, I wouldn't hold ny hopes too high. I'm not sure what the new report is, but this subject has been discussed in a thread titled "Sunspot activity as a proxy for TSI".SSTs are still at record highs in most of the High Arctic and the + gains in 2018 are due to early refreeze of Foxe, Baffin, and HB. .
Baffin yes. Hudson - not much contribution yet and you have ignored recent increase in the Kara.
amsr2-uhh, oct12-nov12, hudson bay, foxe basin and baffin bay (2MB)Aww, the currents present in the area make it hard to follow the refreeze and transport. But well done to catch the start of the freeze up here
that will be fun to see HB cover up to 75% during the next 2 days....did you bother reading my post or are you just angry and illiterate?
it's a very good example for extreme bias that bbr posted today the same nonsense that hudson bay is partly responsible for recent above average gain while in fact hudson is getting behind and did contribute close to nothing and certainly won't be 75% covered in 2 days, not even 50%, probably not even 35%. just admit that it was a false assumption like i expected a significant stall in refreeze while in fact it was very short, hence did not happen the way i speculated/predicted.
lol .. can anyone find the goalposts .. someone keeps moving them .. b.c.
I am confident in predicting that over a good number of years Arctic Sea ice will decline.lol .. can anyone find the goalposts .. someone keeps moving them .. b.c.
best is looking for quoted text because that can't be altered by the author ;)
I agree, but it will take some really extreme weather to have the ice return to 2005-2006 levels. And when sunspots eventually go up again (assuming this short-term forcing negates all of long-term AGW), ice will melt with a vengeance.
Agreed. I don't think there would be any grounds for predicting extreme cold weather except for the low sun spot activity.
Still, you mention 2005-2006 levels as a good standard. According to NSIDC, 2018 just surpassed 2006 in ice extent for 11-12 and is not far behind 2005, 2003 and 2002!
I am confident in predicting that over a good number of years Arctic Sea ice will decline.lol .. can anyone find the goalposts .. someone keeps moving them .. b.c.
best is looking for quoted text because that can't be altered by the author ;)
I have zero confidence in predicting what Hudson Bay will do in the next week.
It is currently "flash freezing" from the NE as the cold reaches past a saline area separating most of HB from Foxe Basin. Most of that yellow in NE HB appeared since yesterday.I am confident in predicting that over a good number of years Arctic Sea ice will decline.lol .. can anyone find the goalposts .. someone keeps moving them .. b.c.
best is looking for quoted text because that can't be altered by the author ;)
I have zero confidence in predicting what Hudson Bay will do in the next week.
agree but i'm confident to predict that we won't see anything like 75% or 50% coverage ;) while it's definitely a pond that's gonna freeze very fast once starting in serious ;)
...did you bother reading my post or are you just angry and illiterate?
QUOTING FOR YOU
HB is going to freeze very quickly over the next week, EURO shows most of it falling sub-29/30F through this time. It has taken awhile to get going but my 11/15 prediction for 75%+ coverage (using NATICE) should be off by less than a week which I am not sad about.
By 10/25, Foxe Basin should be entirely covered, by 11/15, Hudson should be mostly complete (I will say 75-85% at that point). We can revisit this post 11/16 and see if I am wrong.
...did you bother reading my post or are you just angry and illiterate?
QUOTING FOR YOU
HB is going to freeze very quickly over the next week, EURO shows most of it falling sub-29/30F through this time. It has taken awhile to get going but my 11/15 prediction for 75%+ coverage (using NATICE) should be off by less than a week which I am not sad about.
Maybe they were referring to your original post:By 10/25, Foxe Basin should be entirely covered, by 11/15, Hudson should be mostly complete (I will say 75-85% at that point). We can revisit this post 11/16 and see if I am wrong.
You made a falsifiable forecast and it busted. Kudos to you for actually making a falsifiable prediction for once. However, accept your estimation error instead of shifting the goalposts.
I am accepting the error? The forecast was still close to reality. It isn't even 11/15 yet. And it won't be frozen 75% by then. But 11/20? I am not so sure. The point is not that I am wrong or right, the point is that HUDSON BAY IS FREEZING EARLY and this has impacts to sensible weather elsewhere (IMO).Hudson Bay is NOT FREEZING EARLY. Ice area growth in HB is exactly what it was in other recent years, as shown by data from the accurate AMSR2. We are following in 2015's footsteps almost to a pixel. Note: the graph is still in Nov 12th, so 3 more days until the original claim.
Bering has ALWAYS frozen before Hudson since XXXX years ago. Maybe centuries? But in the modern record, I highly doubt we will have ever had as much open water in Bering vs. Hudson as we will a week or so from now. This relative differential is very important because it means cold airmasses can center on North America much earlier and much more steadily vs. normal, anchored by the heat domes in Bering / Barentz on both sides (+500MB anomalies), and this will result in MAJOR oceanic warmth pushing towards the High Arctic as the continental albedo / oceanic heat pump is kicking into ever-higher gear.
The Chukchi area gain is accelerating
I think the freeze up of the Chukchi is going to be interesting. Will it freeze quickly despite how warm it was earlier in the year? The Laptev freeze was so rapid. What an astounding amount of latent heat of fusion the earth radiated away in just a few days. Wow. I wonder if the Chukchi will go the same way.
I don't get all the debate over the Hudson as it's clearly following the pattern of other years +/- a few days.
as you seem to have a lot of knowledge and are willing to put the time investment.
It is funny how all the random old people here don't like model output...
Magna have no worries, your English is very good and you are well undestood.
A guy at NASA just came out with a report saying we will have unusually cold weather starting in about 6 weeks because of persistent lack of sunspot activity. This low has been predicted for years and we’ll see how it affects earth temperatures. Who know but maybe we will get heavy freezing this year over the arctic and see a much needed recovery to ice such as we haven’t seen for decades.
If there is to be such a recovery we need two things: very strong and persistent ice formation this freezing season and cool 2019 with slow ice melt to preserve ice going into next year’s freeze.
“We see a cooling trend,” says Martin Mlynczak of NASA’s Langley Research Center. “High above Earth’s surface, near the edge of space, our atmosphere is losing heat energy. If current trends continue, it could soon set a Space Age record for cold.”
"A guy at NASA"
Zharkova predicts, based on a decline in the strength of the suns magnetic field, that the cooling effect will last for up to 30 years, and suggests that the biggest problem, from a climate prespective, is that the growing season will shorten and harvest failures are almost inevitable. [that Gov. should begin to stockpile food reserves] The prime cause of this escapes me, the subject is glossed/passed over, iirc Zharkova says the effect is like opening the greenhouse window causing a rapid loss of heat to space.
If the above is true, with the ocean being as warm as it is we may see huge energy gradients between the arctic and continental heartlands driving extreme weather. Of course the North Atlantic is cooler than we're used to, this will create a lower background temp. for any weather action in western Europe. With Labrador and Barents being so warm some unusual snowfalls may occur. Interesting times
A small collection of papers. Zharkova critique in No 3.
1. Frost fairs, sunspots and the Little Ice Age
2. The Maunder minimum and the Little Ice Age: an update from
recent reconstructions and climate simulations (posted in #11 above with Fig3)
3. Comment on the paper by Popova et al. “On a role of quadruple component of magnetic field in defining solar activity in grand cycles”
4. Predicting space climate change
Link to Zharkovas recent talk hereJohn, John.
Bbr's combination of poor methodology/research and misleading speculation is like the rubbish one finds on denialist sites. Moreover, his egoic need to be right and his inability to converse with others in a respectful way is also indicative of the righteous divisiveness that has infected public discourse on climate change and other politicized issues.You seem pretty angry. I will be off by a few days re: HB. I don't know why people keep repeating this because obviously 11/15 was incorrect and too early. Give it another week. My overall point has been snow + cold in Canada and surrounding water bodies (CAA HB BB) and overarching warmth elsewhere and that has been 100% correct this autumn.
It's nice to come to ASIF and get a reprieve from all that social media madness. I understand the importance of allowing for disagreeing points of view, but isn't enough, enough? The Arctic has plenty of drama on its own and plenty of areas of debate that are 'in' the realm of actual science.
While I'm glad that bbr's previous very juvenile and nasty post was deleted, i had hoped at least that he would've been banned for a while. Oh well ???
Bbr's combination of poor methodology/research and misleading speculation is like the rubbish one finds on denialist sites. Moreover, his egoic need to be right and his inability to converse with others in a respectful way is also indicative of the righteous divisiveness that has infected public discourse on climate change and other politicized issues.
The three months forecast also shows (with a large pinch of salt) amazingly warm temperatures over the entire Arctic, particularly over the Bering area, but also significant over Greenland and Svalbard. Also surprisingly above average temperatures over the Canadian Archipelago!
The three months forecast also shows (with a large pinch of salt) amazingly warm temperatures over the entire Arctic, particularly over the Bering area, but also significant over Greenland and Svalbard. Also surprisingly above average temperatures over the Canadian Archipelago!
Looking at that chart, I dont see it like that at all !
As long as bbr2314 doesn't try to spread his pet theory into too many threads, I think there's room for him here, so don't dump on him too much. But by all means, point out where he is wrong or the forecasts he posts, don't pan out. How will we get through winter without a bit of heated disagreement? ;)Thanks, Neven.
The three months forecast also shows (with a large pinch of salt) amazingly warm temperatures over the entire Arctic, particularly over the Bering area, but also significant over Greenland and Svalbard. Also surprisingly above average temperatures over the Canadian Archipelago!
Looking at that chart, I dont see it like that at all !
Well, that was like the whole point! I see things that you don't - and my guess is as good as yours as to which is "right" - however, the very unusal warmth over Bering and significant warmth over the Siberian seas, over Svalbard, and significantly, over the entire Greenland ice cap I find truly remarkable.
But does it mean anything? Can I make predictions? Have I made comparisons? No - so it's all just talking off the top of my head.
FTB, I wouldn't hold ny hopes too high. I'm not sure what the new report is, but this subject has been discussed in a thread titled "Sunspot activity as a proxy for TSI".FTB is making stuff up, SSTs are still at record highs in most of the High Arctic and the + gains in 2018 are due to early refreeze of Foxe, Baffin, and HB. Whenever someone says "but solar!" it is cause for automatic dismissal as it means they are a denier.
///////To-date 2018 Arctic sea ice extent is 1.12 million square kilometers MORE than 2016! Now, 2018 also has MORE sea ice extent than the average of the 2010's, despite very warm High Arctic temperatures since direct solar radiation disappeared from the Arctic.Yesterday, to-date 2018 Arctic sea ice extent jumped to 910,000 square kilometers more than 2016. Today, to-date 2018 Arctic sea ice extent jumped to 1 million square kilometers more than 2016.
To-date 2018 Arctic sea ice extent is a total 1.05 million square kilometers more than 2016! Now, 2018 is even approaching the sea ice extent average of the 2010's, despite High Arctic temperatures leaping to 10degC above average.
Nares Strait is often (always? in recent years) open at least into December (but I don't have the statistics). In 2006-07, it never closed. I understand that in other years no effective bridge formed, too. Neven, in 2013, recommended The Broken Bridges of Nares (http://www.science20.com/chatter_box/arctic_tipping_points_4_broken_bridges_nares) for those who want to learn some history of Nares ice bridges.
<snippage>Neven, in 2013, recommended The Broken Bridges of Nares (http://www.science20.com/chatter_box/arctic_tipping_points_4_broken_bridges_nares) for those who want to learn some history of Nares ice bridges.
The freezing season is very strong of late. After falling to lowest ever 2018 is now in 11th place, exceeding every year since 2006 in ice extent except 2008 and 2014. Can’t be sure what’s driving this since temps in arctic are not below average.
The "strong refreeze" narrative is a bunch of nonsense. There is more heat than ever in the high-latitude oceans (Bering and Barents). The refreeze has been led by the situation in Baffin, CAA, and Hudson Bay, and the early refreeze of these regions for reasons that portend a very LATE refreeze in the high Arctic are exactly why this trope is ridiculous. 2018 has seen a quick refreeze of certain peripheral regions due to conditions resulting from the worst-ever anomalies further to the north and this pattern will continue through winter, while numbers may even be higher than 2017 through May, I expect the bottom to fall out by the end of May or June again (mimicking closely what happened in spring 2015).
The "strong refreeze" narrative is a bunch of nonsense. There is more heat than ever in the high-latitude oceans (Bering and Barents).
It is happening. Go look at EOSDIS and stop screeching, jeez. You sound like an angry parrot.The "strong refreeze" narrative is a bunch of nonsense. There is more heat than ever in the high-latitude oceans (Bering and Barents). The refreeze has been led by the situation in Baffin, CAA, and Hudson Bay, and the early refreeze of these regions for reasons that portend a very LATE refreeze in the high Arctic are exactly why this trope is ridiculous. 2018 has seen a quick refreeze of certain peripheral regions due to conditions resulting from the worst-ever anomalies further to the north and this pattern will continue through winter, while numbers may even be higher than 2017 through May, I expect the bottom to fall out by the end of May or June again (mimicking closely what happened in spring 2015).
I know many here have tried to explain to you and it didn't work, but as of this morning there is NO SIGNIFICANT EARLY REFREEZE of Hudson Bay. Look at UH data (at least I think it's UH) that has been posted several times. First significant area uptick (20k+) when you look at NSIDC 5-day average that gerontocrat is posting, was today. If you keep saying something is happening, that won't make it true. It might happen in the next couple of days (strong gains) but as of now it DIDN'T, despite your constant writing.
Because of that, even some of your points that are valid people won't take seriously, instead they'll think you are spreading misinformation again.
It's not being angry, it's making important parts more visible, like when you write LATE for example. I can do that either by making it bold or using capital letters. But I'll make it bold in the future so, there isn't misunderstanding.It is happening much earlier than normal and AMQRTWTWT will show this imminently, but in the meantime, I would advise looking at actual EOSDIS imagery instead of trusting some random computer's output. It can be visually informative. The refreeze will be mostly done in a few days.
The refreeze will be mostly done in a few days.
bbr, if you have a point to make about HB and EOSDIS, why don't you post a comparison of EOSDIS images for 2018 vs. 2015, 2014, 2017, 2013? These are years where UH AMSR2 area data shows similar values. The best would be an animation. Instead of capitalizing messages and making sure to post the last word, you could try to actually prove your point.Go here and swap out the year for the year you want to compare with for a uniform and easy way to gauge comparisons between years: (link may say unsecure) I would do a GIF but they save as .gifs so screenshotting etc is too much work.
Calling UH AMSR2 data "some random computer's output" on this forum is not going to cut it.
Can’t be sure what’s driving this since temps in arctic are not below average.Much of the over-heating in the Arctic & High Arctic, usually comes from temperate & even tropical lower latitudes, during this time of complete Arctic darkness. Presently however, cold that has been in almost all of fall Canada, dipping at times into the U.S., strengthened a week or two ago. Parts of the mid U.S., at times, were 20degC below average, with some cold dipping into Mexico. Also, the Canadian cold pushed into the Arctic & even to the High Arctic. The High Arctic for the past two months, being as high as 10degC over normal, has not only dropped precipitously in degC, but even fell further, as much as 7degC below anomalous high levels, during this period of fall complete Arctic darkness.
Aluminium, is it not possible to make it a little bit bigger ? So that we can see what happens east end west of greenland .I don't want to change area. Any area may be a little bit bigger. Current size is convenient for me and includes main part of the Arctic Ocean.
The freezing season is very strong of late. After falling to lowest ever 2018 is now in 11th place, exceeding every year since 2006 in ice extent except 2008 and 2014. Can’t be sure what’s driving this since temps in arctic are not below average.
The freezing season is very strong of late. After falling to lowest ever 2018 is now in 11th place, exceeding every year since 2006 in ice extent except 2008 and 2014. Can’t be sure what’s driving this since temps in arctic are not below average.
I was wondering about the exact same thing. could it maybe have something to do with the Mpemba effect (warmer water freezes quicker than cold water) ?
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1310/1310.6514.pdf
In only a few days, the gap between 2016 & 2018 ripped wider by 4/10ths of a million square kilometers to a total difference of 1.2 million square kilometers. As wide a gap as this most recent diversion from each other is, it can be expected that even wider 2016-2018 splits in sea ice quantities will occur in the next days ahead.As expected, in 1 day the 2016-2018 sea ice extent gap ripped open further, now to almost 1.5 million square kilometers. Most of the sea ice gap ripping was due to the present High Arctic & Arctic atmospheric chilling, funneling from Canada. However, the extreme to-date 2016 anomalous heating also caused sea ice extent LOSS, contributing to the wild splaying 2016-2018 sea ice extent separation. Should be more 2016-2018 sea ice extent widening coming.
No problem. I block you until June. Your now irrelevant half a mega is currently inconvenient for me when loading the page. Merry Christmas and happy 2019!Aluminium, is it not possible to make it a little bit bigger ? So that we can see what happens east end west of greenland .I don't want to change area. Any area may be a little bit bigger. Current size is convenient for me and includes main part of the Arctic Ocean.
November 14-18.
Just to put in a different opinion, I find Aluminium's animations still quite useful. I do not they are not posted daily anymore, but actually every two days which is better in the current season. The developments in the Chukchi and Barents/Kara/Svalbard regions are still relevant and informative.
Or post them every 5-10 days.It's highly likely. Changes in the central Arctic will be minimal but the Barents Sea and, possible, the Bering Strait still could be interesting in winter.
I am sure Hudson Bay will freeze up quickly over the next few days,By Friday /Saturday extreme cold will have lessened greatly in much of Central Canada including south of Foxe Basin. This could slow freezing of the southern half of Hudson Bay considerably.
That is a 213 hour forecast map and the GFS has had a very warm bias over Hudson Bay in recent months. It does not have dynamic ice-atmospheric coupling so it remains with the starting ice #s for the duration of its run (that is to say, it still has 00z hr ice coverage by D10 in Hudson Bay, when that is most definitely inaccurate and likely wildly so).I am sure Hudson Bay will freeze up quickly over the next few days,By Friday /Saturday extreme cold will have lessened greatly in much of Central Canada including south of Foxe Basin. This could slow freezing of the southern half of Hudson Bay considerably.
my thoughts exactly hence sorry to share your property [Just Kidding]
in such cases it's at times good to look at temps instead of anomalies because anomalies of +20C in winter can mean -20C still cold enough for a full freeze but it's not the case here. it will be above zero over southern HB and everything what you already said +1
The Atlantic ice front and the Fram Strait are also quite interesting. :)Or post them every 5-10 days.It's highly likely. Changes in the central Arctic will be minimal but the Barents Sea and, possible, the Bering Strait still could be interesting in winter.
The freezing season is very strong of late. After falling to lowest ever 2018 is now in 11th place, exceeding every year since 2006 in ice extent except 2008 and 2014. Can’t be sure what’s driving this since temps in arctic are not below average.Quick from the hip theory - less imported humidity from lower latitudes, thus less to impede outbound longwave radiation, *and* lower humidity would permit greater evaporation, which is a very local energy transfer directly from the water surface that would drop sea surface temperatures even with "warmer" atmosphere.
That is a 213 hour forecast map
It was 213 hours, it says so on the upper top, initialized 11/19 and forecast date: 11/28...
That is a 213 hour forecast map
No it was not. More like 120 hrs in the future (from yesterday).
And here is a GFS map for Saturday Nov 24 - about 100 hrs from now. A blip in Hudson Bay freezing is possible. It also suggests some reduction in the extreme cold in NE Canada in the days after.
My map was not. One, I suppose, should be entirely specific to avoid such disputes.It was 213 hours, it says so on the upper top, initialized 11/19 and forecast date: 11/28...
That is a 213 hour forecast map
No it was not. More like 120 hrs in the future (from yesterday).
And here is a GFS map for Saturday Nov 24 - about 100 hrs from now. A blip in Hudson Bay freezing is possible. It also suggests some reduction in the extreme cold in NE Canada in the days after.
Literally pasting this here because I'm not wrong / it's ironic to see the people screaming about posts D5+ posting spot output for a certain hour with a model that has known biases that make it completely unreliable by that point for that specific region.
The results of this study lead to an important conclusion. The true forced pattern of NH temperature change since 1990—given the trajectory of observed sea ice loss, SST variations, and overall radiative forcing—is characterized as “Warm Arctic, Warm Continents”. In consequence, the observed 24 year trend pattern of winter temperatures since 1990 should not be interpreted as expressing a sustainable trajectory of climate. Rather, the so-called “Warm Arctic, Cold Continents” regime is transient and is becoming increasing unlikely as climate continues to warm.
To put current events a bit in perspective: The last time the daily JAXA arctic sea ice extent did not rank in the top 11 was 25th April 2012. Since then, every single day was in the lowest 11 at the time - until yesterday.
That's a great signal for the ice. But on the other hand, we all know what happened the months after the last time it was this "high" in 2012.
I believe that temperatures tell us the real story about the state of the Arctic. Attached is the November to October (12 months) average temperature 70N-90N (ie, the last data plot is the average temp from 2017 Nov to 2018 Oct). Nothing to cheer at, things are actually worse than 2012 or 2007:
It seems a paradox to be getting warmer while the freeze is so fast.
Agreed. It looks like there is only movement in the Nares now.
Here is a comparison of 2017 and 2018, using amsr2-uhh, from oct1 to nov19. 2017 is outlined in green.
Agreed. It looks like there is only movement in the Nares now.
Here is a comparison of 2017 and 2018, using amsr2-uhh, from oct1 to nov19. 2017 is outlined in green.
This animation is very, very nice. I wish I could 'like' it twice.
In regards to the well-known trend of increased relative cold and snow in the subarctic/midlatitudes, let's clear up the oh-my-god-look-at-the-upcoming-glaciation misnomer and put this trend back into perspective. This trend has been ongoing since 1990 as discussed via WACC and its surmised drivers, e.g. Arctic Amplification, sea ice loss and greater flux or disruption in the AO, polar vortex and jet stream. https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/people/lantao.sun/publications/2016_SPH_GRL.pdf (https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/people/lantao.sun/publications/2016_SPH_GRL.pdf)The trend towards warm arctic cold continents began in 2012. It has accelerated since. Throwing random research and data points instead of reading everything that has been written since is fine. But adding that tidbit re: Cohen is absurd -- he is not onto anything, "SAI" is nonsense, it is simply the same feedback that has always existed that has kicked into higher gear since 2012. Hansen has knowledge, Cohen only produces nonsense acronyms.QuoteThe results of this study lead to an important conclusion. The true forced pattern of NH temperature change since 1990—given the trajectory of observed sea ice loss, SST variations, and overall radiative forcing—is characterized as “Warm Arctic, Warm Continents”. In consequence, the observed 24 year trend pattern of winter temperatures since 1990 should not be interpreted as expressing a sustainable trajectory of climate. Rather, the so-called “Warm Arctic, Cold Continents” regime is transient and is becoming increasing unlikely as climate continues to warm.
The perspective that jdallen has regarding all this seems most spot on to me. That being we are amidst a kind of interim chaotic state change where wild fluctuations represent an ongoing drastic shift in our climate and arctic sea ice formation. (hope i paraphrased JD correctly?) My concern and inquiry, with the relative increased continental cold and corresponding decreased atmospheric pressures, is to what degree does WACC create its own positive feedback loop - especially related to the increased cold/decreased pressures that builds in Siberia? Seems like Cohen might be on to something there.
I just don't see it in the forecast. To me it looks like the PV at any level is displaced, and the timing is coincident with the influence of an extratropical cyclone entering the arctic. As the GFS outlook has evolved, the PV moves away from the north pole toward Svalbard and Siberia, but quickly recovers around Nov 15
I wouldn't predict necessarily but it seems to indicate milder weather mid-month for the Eastern US and Canada.
The trend towards warm arctic cold continents began in 2012Did you even read the article i posted? It defines WACC beginning in 1990 and shows actual data that clearly backs up the trend.
But adding that tidbit re: Cohen is absurd -- he is not onto anything, "SAI" is nonsense, it is simply the same feedback that has always existed that has kicked into higher gear since 2012.What? This is exactly what i'm referring to about WACC having a positive feedback, i.e. accelerating itself and making it even more of a climatological flash in the pan - so to speak. What is your point and where is your science and data?
BBR,
If I understand your November 13 prediction (#685 in this thread (https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2413.msg180878.html#msg180878)), Hudson Bay (HB) is going to have 75% ice coverage by 11/15 (plus 6 days, because we are among friends) using NATICE. I found a few references to "NATICE" in this thread, but no links. Can you provide one, so that we can connect your prediction with the reference you specified? Today is the day, but tomorrow (or the next day, I presume) will show today's extent. (The ASIG-regional (https://sites.google.com/site/arcticseaicegraphs/regional) [a different calibration, for sure], as SH posted, shows for HB less than 50% extent as of yesterday.)
"cloud streets" in the Barents (associated with cold winds of a meandering central anti-cyclonic high) will continue out to March 25th and beyond, per GFS.
Twitter can confuse these with with blowing Antarctic ice needles or katabatic Greenland winds but Zach notes correctly today these are parallel bands of cumulus clouds that form as cold winds from the north blow off the ice edge onto warmer ocean waters.
OK, but why now, why cumulus mediocris, and what causes the street banding?
The temperature differential between cold air blowing off the ice and the sea surface water, either open leads or more commonly beyond the ice edge, can easily exceed 20ºC in March. Thermal columns of moist heated air rise off the sea surface until they hit a denser warmer lid of air (provided a temperature inversion is present).
As the thermals are advected downwind and sink or rise according to ambient density differences, they form parallel pairs of counter-rotating cylinders of air. On the upper surface of rising air, water vapor cools and condenses into flat-bottomed, fluffy-topped clouds (ie cumulus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumulus_cloud). On the downdrafts, condensates evaporate giving clear skies on the sides of the clouds, the banding.
Surprisingly, the alignment of vortices alone does not reliably indicate wind direction. Stably stratified environments have lines 30° off CCW to the left; only an unstably stratified (ie convective) situation has bands parallel to mean wind.
Cloud streets are technically called horizontal convective rolls. The most favorable conditions for them occur when the lowermost layer of air is unstable, driven by a moderate wind and capped by a stable inversion, a common situation when upper air is subsiding, such as under recently prevailing anticyclonic conditions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizontal_convective_rolls turbulent momentum flux in PBL
<snip>
Those are 5 day trailing averages so that is not fair.BBR,
If I understand your November 13 prediction (#685 in this thread (https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2413.msg180878.html#msg180878)), Hudson Bay (HB) is going to have 75% ice coverage by 11/15 (plus 6 days, because we are among friends) using NATICE. I found a few references to "NATICE" in this thread, but no links. Can you provide one, so that we can connect your prediction with the reference you specified? Today is the day, but tomorrow (or the next day, I presume) will show today's extent. (The ASIG-regional (https://sites.google.com/site/arcticseaicegraphs/regional) [a different calibration, for sure], as SH posted, shows for HB less than 50% extent as of yesterday.)
As at 20 Nov -
NSIDC Area circa 25% of max,
NSIDC extent circa 50% of max
and that's all I'm going to say about that
(pentajoule-scale increases in total oceanic enthalpy)Thank you for the correction. I plead haste and fatigue.
Should be petajoule
Thanks BBR.Big jump today! Maybe it'll get there tomorrow or the next day but doesn't look like 75% just yet. Alas!
NATICE for today. Is HB 75% covered? I don't think so, but I don't have a pixel counter.
NOAA's NATICE (https://www.natice.noaa.gov/pub/ims/ims_gif/DATA/cursnow_usa.gif)
Persistent winds from between north and east, have shaved 3 C off the Chukchi SSTs in the past three weeks. The Bering has dropped a little more slowly ~ 2 C.Yes, the arrival of second year ice from the Beaufort should help it freeze over (hopefully not just melt. edit: iirc quite a few MYI floes met their end in the Chukchi around this time last year. edit2:no, it was april this year)
ESRL is forecasting Chukchi largely frozen in 7 days.
...... the 2016-2018 sea ice extent gap ripped open further, now to almost 1.5 million square kilometers. Most of the sea ice gap ripping was due to the present High Arctic & Arctic atmospheric chilling, funneling from Canada. However, the extreme to-date 2016 anomalous heating also caused sea ice extent LOSS, contributing to the wild splaying 2016-2018 sea ice extent separation. Should be more 2016-2018 sea ice extent widening coming.The last fews days have placed the first (& largest) to-date 2016 sea ice extent LOSS in this general time of sea ice extent gain, graphically in the past. 2018 sea ice extent gain is presently paralleling the 2016 sea ice extent gain, but 1.5+ million square kilometers greater. Present High Arctic temperature is somewhat lower than the same period 2016 High Arctic temperature, possibly helping to maintain the 2016-2018 Arctic sea ice gap.
Yes, though looking at sea ice area it's only CAFS forecasting that. GFS is much less optimistic.QuoteESRL is forecasting Chukchi largely frozen in 7 days.
Let's hope that forecast comes through.
Alas, indeed.Thanks BBR.Big jump today! Maybe it'll get there tomorrow or the next day but doesn't look like 75% just yet. Alas!
NATICE for today. Is HB 75% covered? I don't think so, but I don't have a pixel counter.
NOAA's NATICE (https://www.natice.noaa.gov/pub/ims/ims_gif/DATA/cursnow_usa.gif)
IDK about that, modeling has the tropospheric PV rotating back into HB by D7-8 or so... this frame is D10 but the progression is well underway before then.Alas, indeed.Thanks BBR.Big jump today! Maybe it'll get there tomorrow or the next day but doesn't look like 75% just yet. Alas!
NATICE for today. Is HB 75% covered? I don't think so, but I don't have a pixel counter.
NOAA's NATICE (https://www.natice.noaa.gov/pub/ims/ims_gif/DATA/cursnow_usa.gif)
Warmth did reach the southern half of Hudson Bay - above zero.
Area gain has slowed somewhat.
Below freezing will return, but perhaps not that intense cold as before.
There is - what is, andIndeed, and then, there is - what may likely be.
there is - what may be.
Still way to far out. There were lots of forecasts last fall that suggested all kinds of dire stuff - worse for ice creation than 2016 - but which moderated dramatically when we got closer to the 4 day window. What you are seeing at day 8 is still so general and has such high probability of error that it has little utility beyond tweaking our curiosity.There is - what is, andIndeed, and then, there is - what may likely be.
there is - what may be.
GFS, CMC, EURO all show same thing. ;)
All ensembles are also in agreement. This is partially due to the recurving WPAC storm / typhoon which becomes a major low near AK. I think this leads to a higher probability forecast vs. normal. But if I am wrong, feel free to throw this in my face come D8 (I will post verification then, myself!).Still way to far out. There were lots of forecasts last fall that suggested all kinds of dire stuff - worse for ice creation than 2016 - but which moderated dramatically when we got closer to the 4 day window. What you are seeing at day 8 is still so general and has such high probability of error that it has little utility beyond tweaking our curiosity.There is - what is, andIndeed, and then, there is - what may likely be.
there is - what may be.
GFS, CMC, EURO all show same thing. ;)
Warmth did reach the southern half of Hudson Bay - above zero.
Area gain has slowed somewhat.
Below freezing will return, but perhaps not that intense cold as before.
What you are doing is effectively rolling dice. Like in craps, you eventually might make your point, but the advantage remains with the house. Like in craps, the success of your predictions when they happen are overwhelmingly luck rather than skill.All ensembles are also in agreement. This is partially due to the recurving WPAC storm / typhoon which becomes a major low near AK. I think this leads to a higher probability forecast vs. normal. But if I am wrong, feel free to throw this in my face come D8 (I will post verification then, myself!).Still way to far out. There were lots of forecasts last fall that suggested all kinds of dire stuff - worse for ice creation than 2016 - but which moderated dramatically when we got closer to the 4 day window. What you are seeing at day 8 is still so general and has such high probability of error that it has little utility beyond tweaking our curiosity.There is - what is, andIndeed, and then, there is - what may likely be.
there is - what may be.
GFS, CMC, EURO all show same thing. ;)
So you don't believe in forecast models? OK.What you are doing is effectively rolling dice. Like in craps, you eventually might make your point, but the advantage remains with the house. Like in craps, the success of your predictions when they happen are overwhelmingly luck rather than skill.All ensembles are also in agreement. This is partially due to the recurving WPAC storm / typhoon which becomes a major low near AK. I think this leads to a higher probability forecast vs. normal. But if I am wrong, feel free to throw this in my face come D8 (I will post verification then, myself!).Still way to far out. There were lots of forecasts last fall that suggested all kinds of dire stuff - worse for ice creation than 2016 - but which moderated dramatically when we got closer to the 4 day window. What you are seeing at day 8 is still so general and has such high probability of error that it has little utility beyond tweaking our curiosity.There is - what is, andIndeed, and then, there is - what may likely be.
there is - what may be.
GFS, CMC, EURO all show same thing. ;)
So you don't believe in forecast models? OK.What you are doing is effectively rolling dice. Like in craps, you eventually might make your point, but the advantage remains with the house. Like in craps, the success of your predictions when they happen are overwhelmingly luck rather than skill.All ensembles are also in agreement. This is partially due to the recurving WPAC storm / typhoon which becomes a major low near AK. I think this leads to a higher probability forecast vs. normal. But if I am wrong, feel free to throw this in my face come D8 (I will post verification then, myself!).Still way to far out. There were lots of forecasts last fall that suggested all kinds of dire stuff - worse for ice creation than 2016 - but which moderated dramatically when we got closer to the 4 day window. What you are seeing at day 8 is still so general and has such high probability of error that it has little utility beyond tweaking our curiosity.There is - what is, andIndeed, and then, there is - what may likely be.
there is - what may be.
GFS, CMC, EURO all show same thing. ;)
Forgive me for the long post, i know this thread is not the place for it but i think it might be helpful to put all the weather discussion into context."the land heat building under the snow"... outside of melting permafrost, you know this isn't a thing, right? Oceans accumulate heat, land does not, otherwise the tropics would always scorch.
Since WACC began in 1990 the overall heating of the northern hemisphere has been no less than shocking.
https://youtu.be/HTV-yUssz9o
The cold in the continents is primarily in winter and overwhelmingly a Eurasian phenomena.
(https://i.imgur.com/spnm2X2.png)
For source see: http://www.cesm.ucar.edu/events/wg-meetings/2016/presentations/cvcwg/lsun.pdf (http://www.cesm.ucar.edu/events/wg-meetings/2016/presentations/cvcwg/lsun.pdf)
Given the shocking overall heating trend this means that the seasonal temperature swings are extraordinary. Is this causing a trend of late refreeze and the subsequent rapid spikes in freezing?
Zack is working on a new research paper right now, however he mentioned afterwards that he could create a plot(s) that would help us visualize the seasonal and spatial nature of the temperature trend in question.
With all the heat in our climate regime (especially the oceans) it's a bit ludicrous how deniers get all excited about how arctic blasts are indicative of some cooling trend in America, etc. All i can say is if you live by the cold of jet stream perturbations then you will die by the flip side of those same perturbations as the extra heat in the system comes back to whack you with a dose of reality. Macro thermodynamics will always have the final say.
In the same regard on a seasonal scale, any increase in snow accumulation serves to trap an inordinate amount of heat in the land, instead of letting it escape into space. There are profound near-term negative effects of this particularly as it relates to the permafrost and related positive GHG feedbacks as given in this recent excellent article: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2018/08/news-arctic-permafrost-may-thaw-faster-than-expected/
Even though during the freezing season, the trapping of that heat may help to offset the overall climate warming trend, in the end doesn't it only serves to seal our doom (pun intended) because there is less days of the year for that heat to make it out to space, especially with all the extra carbon in the atmosphere?
Just like all the heat building in our oceans, the land heat building under the snow will make it's way to melting the ice - powerfully overriding any signal of seasonal temperature fluctuations or snow accumulation.
[1] Trends in soil temperature are important, but rarely reported, indicators of climate
change. On the basis of the soil temperature data from 30 climate stations across
Canada during 1958–2008, trends in soil temperatures at 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, and 150 cm
depths were analyzed, together with atmospheric variables, such as air temperature,
precipitation, and depth of snow on the ground, observed at the same locations. There was
a significant positive trend with soil temperatures in spring and summer means, but not
for the winter and annual means. A positive trend with time in soil temperature was
detected at about two‐thirds of the stations at all depths below 5 cm. A warming trend of
0.26–0.30°C/decade was consistently detected in spring (March–April–May) at all depths
between 1958 and 2008. The warming trend in soil temperatures was associated with
trends in air temperatures and snow cover depth over the same period. A significant
decreasing trend in snow cover depth in winter and spring was associated with increasing
air temperatures. The combined effects of the higher air temperature and reduced snow
depth probably resulted in an enhanced increasing trend in spring soil temperatures, but no
significant trends in winter soil temperatures. The thermal insulation by snow cover
appeared to play an important role in the response of soil temperatures to climate change
and must be accounted for in projecting future soil‐related impacts of climate change.
"the land heat building under the snow"... outside of melting permafrost, you know this isn't a thing, right? Oceans accumulate heat, land does not, otherwise the tropics would always scorch.I never said it was accumulating heat, i said it was not allowing the heat to escape into space - hence increase net enthalpy.
How about this article?Thanks Tor. The scientists in the more recent article i posted above point to a stronger relationship between snow cover and winter soil temps:
But in a region where temperatures can dip to 40 degrees below zero Fahrenheit, the Zimovs say unusually high snowfall this year worked like a blanket, trapping excess heat in the ground. They found sections 30 inches deep—soils that typically freeze before Christmas—that had stayed damp and mushy all winter. For the first time in memory, ground that insulates deep Arctic permafrost simply did not freeze in winter.
What you are doing is effectively rolling dice. Like in craps, ....
How about this article?
Observed soil temperature trends associated with climate
change in Canada (https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1029/2010JD015012)
[authors listed]; published 21 January 2011.Quote[1] Trends in soil temperature are important, but rarely reported, indicators of climate
change. On the basis of the soil temperature data from 30 climate stations across
Canada during 1958–2008, trends in soil temperatures at 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, and 150 cm
depths were analyzed, together with atmospheric variables, such as air temperature,
precipitation, and depth of snow on the ground, observed at the same locations. There was
a significant positive trend with soil temperatures in spring and summer means, but not
for the winter and annual means. A positive trend with time in soil temperature was
detected at about two‐thirds of the stations at all depths below 5 cm. A warming trend of
0.26–0.30°C/decade was consistently detected in spring (March–April–May) at all depths
between 1958 and 2008. The warming trend in soil temperatures was associated with
trends in air temperatures and snow cover depth over the same period. A significant
decreasing trend in snow cover depth in winter and spring was associated with increasing
air temperatures. The combined effects of the higher air temperature and reduced snow
depth probably resulted in an enhanced increasing trend in spring soil temperatures, but no
significant trends in winter soil temperatures. The thermal insulation by snow cover
appeared to play an important role in the response of soil temperatures to climate change
and must be accounted for in projecting future soil‐related impacts of climate change.
Basically there is an extra layer of insulation for the heat to conduct through before it can be lost via IR to space.So the Earth is on fire already? What are you people saying? If the ground accumulates heat so readily (contrary to what the quoted paper explicitly states re: annual basis) why aren't we already like Venus? Sweet Jesus....
Hmm - interesting. BBR - the best way to think of this is that the surface of the snow is below 0°C, losing IR to space. The ground surface is at 0°C (snow is melting at the snow- ground interface) or colder, but it is warmer than the surface of the snow. The rate of heat loss from the ground is dependent on the thermal conductivity of the insulating snow, it's depth, and the temperature differential. More snow, less heat conducted and lost to space, more bad news for the planet.
The summer heat starts conducting down into the ground and then you get a snow fall (after insolation can no longer melt it), the heat starts to conduct both up and down from where it has reached. The snow in the winter traps the heat from insolation, but doesn't really prevent insolation. It melts very quickly in spring.
bbr, instead of thinking of your extra snow as heralding the next glaciation ::) Think of it as concentrated CO2 that's seasonally trapping heat in the land - like how C02 traps heat in the air. The heat that's trapped in the land will make its way out after enough snow melts however less of that heat (how much less?) will go out to space. And yes some of that heat will help add to the longer-lasting battery known as our oceans.OK, so you are telling me that Greenland is actually emitting heat. Thanks. You are super smart! That must also be why Greenland had the strongest mass balance gain since 1972 this year.
Viewing your extra snow as C02 is ironic because it's also causing an accelerated release of GHGs via melting permafrost. The net result of all this judging by the vast majority of observations, clear thinking and science -> We are climatically accelerating in the opposite direction of a glaciation.
....Think of it as concentrated CO2 that's seasonally trapping heat in the land - like how C02 traps heat in the air......
bbr, instead of thinking of your extra snow as heralding the next glaciation ::) Think of it as concentrated CO2 that's seasonally trapping heat in the land - like how C02 traps heat in the air. The heat that's trapped in the land will make its way out after enough snow melts however less of that heat (how much less?) will go out to space. And yes some of that heat will help add to the longer-lasting battery known as our oceans.OK, so you are telling me that Greenland is actually emitting heat. Thanks. You are super smart! That must also be why Greenland had the strongest mass balance gain since 1972 this year.
Viewing your extra snow as C02 is ironic because it's also causing an accelerated release of GHGs via melting permafrost. The net result of all this judging by the vast majority of observations, clear thinking and science -> We are climatically accelerating in the opposite direction of a glaciation.
Is Antarctica also emitting heat? What happens when it snows there? LOL
The level of delusion on this forum is insane. I am taking a break from this thread because answering these stupid replies is itself stupid. Enjoy wallowing in whatever it is you are wallowing in.
The permafrost in question is not soil, more ice/water than anything else. the specific heat (https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/specific-heat-capacity-d_391.html) of water is very high, it takes a lot of energy to raise it's temperature. It can accumulate energy almost to the degree the sea can and hardly warm up at all.Thanks! Interesting that you post this because i was going to ask Rox about his heat flow estimates relative to moist soil and liquified permafrost.
The level of delusion on this forum is insane. I am taking a break from this thread because answering these stupid replies is itself stupid. Enjoy wallowing in whatever it is you are wallowing in.
magnamentis, idk what your bones to pick with me are
The soil and rock below us cannot absorb as much water as the ocean, but it still can absorb quite a lot.Brown Ocean effect (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_ocean_effect)
Since the recent greatest "2018-2016 Arctic sea ice extent" gap of 1.5+ million square kilometers, the gap has been decreasing, now to just 1.0+ million square kilometers. Present 2018 High Arctic atmospheric temperatures aren't as high as the same period in 2016, which would NOT explain the present narrowing between 2018 & 2016....... the 2016-2018 sea ice extent gap ripped open further, now to almost 1.5 million square kilometers. Most of the sea ice gap ripping was due to the present High Arctic & Arctic atmospheric chilling, funneling from Canada. However, the extreme to-date 2016 anomalous heating also caused sea ice extent LOSS, contributing to the wild splaying 2016-2018 sea ice extent separation. Should be more 2016-2018 sea ice extent widening coming.The last fews days have placed the first (& largest) to-date 2016 sea ice extent LOSS in this general time of sea ice extent gain, graphically in the past. 2018 sea ice extent gain is presently paralleling the 2016 sea ice extent gain, but 1.5+ million square kilometers greater. Present High Arctic temperature is somewhat lower than the same period 2016 High Arctic temperature, possibly helping to maintain the 2016-2018 Arctic sea ice gap.
Trivia break motivated by some recent controversy:
...In contrast the soil and rock pretty much does not mix up or down except in very unusual circumstances, and heat can only move in or out through conduction, and not be convection....
Enjoy wallowing in whatever it is you are wallowing in.
Good idea! Things are accumulating...
It does mean that the depth when there is very little yearly variation is easy to find. I think it's about 2-3 meters for a decent wine cellar in Oxford.
Fram Strait is the northernmost extension of the northern North Atlantic, and is the only deep gateway to the Arctic Ocean. The eastern Fram Strait is characterized by the West Spitsbergen Current carrying warm Atlantic Water northwards along the shelf-break ( Fahrbach et al., 2001;Schauer and BeszczynskaMöller, 2009;Beszczynska-Möller et al., 2012), continuing eastwards on the northern side of Svalbard (Figure 1). The current system west of Svalbard is complex and consists of three branches (Nilsen et al., 2016); an inner branch (the easternmost) crossing the Yermak Plateau, a branch following the western rim of the Yermak Plateau, and an offshore branch often called the Return Atlantic Current going further offshore and sending filaments of Atlantic Water westwards across Fram Strait.
https://tinyurl.com/y9cf8lqx
Knutsen, Tor & Wiebe, Peter & Gjøsæter, Harald & Ingvaldsen, Randi & Lien, Gunnar. (2017). High Latitude Epipelagic and Mesopelagic Scattering Layers - A Reference for Future Arctic Ecosystem Change. Frontiers in Marine Science. 4. 10.3389/fmars.2017.00334.
LoL cue peanuts voices in rebukeAll ensembles are also in agreement. This is partially due to the recurving WPAC storm / typhoon which becomes a major low near AK. I think this leads to a higher probability forecast vs. normal. But if I am wrong, feel free to throw this in my face come D8 (I will post verification then, myself!).Still way to far out. There were lots of forecasts last fall that suggested all kinds of dire stuff - worse for ice creation than 2016 - but which moderated dramatically when we got closer to the 4 day window. What you are seeing at day 8 is still so general and has such high probability of error that it has little utility beyond tweaking our curiosity.There is - what is, andIndeed, and then, there is - what may likely be.
there is - what may be.
GFS, CMC, EURO all show same thing. ;)
LoL cue peanuts voices in rebukeWas your forecast right or wrong?
The unanimous forecast model output was correct, or rather, it will be in 48-72 hours.LoL cue peanuts voices in rebukeWas your forecast right or wrong?
Still tracking 2015 closely. And you know what came after 2015 :)
Anyway, Atlantification adn Pacification seem to be the driving forces during the past couple of years...
November 27 - December 2.While the Kara continues freezing, the Chukchi is holding and the Atlantic front is fighting back.
Still tracking 2015 closely.
2011 is another comparative year to this year and what happened in 2012?
Any chance you can do the comparative map between 2011 and 2018?
Chukchi might be icing over in the next week or two if the GFS extended forecast holds decently true.The GFS *always* overestimates cold over the highly saline SSTs up north, and does the inverse for the fresh SSTs to their south (Kara, HB). I would be this is another false alarm. The model bias is systemic and incorrigible...!
Since the recent greatest "2018-2016 Arctic sea ice extent" gap of 1.5+ million square kilometers, the gap has been decreasing, now to just 1.0+ million square kilometers. Present 2018 High Arctic atmospheric temperatures aren't as high as the same period in 2016, which would NOT explain the present narrowing between 2018 & 2016.2018 Arctic sea ice extent has reduced to the level of the average of the 2010's AND continues reducing the gap to 2016, now only ~ 0.6 million square kilometers greater.
Since the recent greatest "2018-2016 Arctic sea ice extent" gap of 1.5+ million square kilometers, the gap has been decreasing, now to just 1.0+ million square kilometers. Present 2018 High Arctic atmospheric temperatures aren't as high as the same period in 2016, which would NOT explain the present narrowing between 2018 & 2016.2018 Arctic sea ice extent has reduced to the level of the average of the 2010's AND continues reducing the gap to 2016, now only ~ 0.6 million square kilometers greater.
<snippage>A reminder that warmer salty water tends to sink below colder fresh water. The atlantic side has a stronger current/larger incoming volume than the pacific but both tend to be limited in 'encroachment' by the depth of the arctic ocean (or sea or estuary).
The shrinking distance between the encroaching salty oceans
First, I've always referred to no local temperatures outside the High Arctic. My references have always been of average temperatures over the High Arctic which is almost 4 million square miles surrounding the North Pole. Second, since you mention 20C above normal while referring to my posts, you must mean the 2016 early December anomalous temperature. During this anomalous 20degC above average temp event over 4 million square miles surrounding the North Pole, it was NOT -20degC. The actual temperature was -7degC., again, averaged over 4 million square miles surrounding the North Pole. Third, while the average temperature over 4 million square miles around the North Pole was -7degC, thawing regional temperatures 700 miles(& greater?) to the south, outside the High Arctic were occurring AND did reduce Arctic sea ice extent. To state that such vast heats in the Arctic negligibly impact Arctic sea ice growth, specially in the instance that you need major correction of the true temperature AND areas affected, truly casts your allegation aside. Fourth, your consideration that VAST High Arctic temperature rises (erroneous in two ways, on your part) are only coincidentally timed to minimal sea ice growth, AND even to Arctic sea ice LOSSES(NOT mentioned by you), during usual times of vast Arctic sea ice gains, must be thought little researched by you.....temps alone, even while 20C above norm, if those 20C above norma(sic) are -20C the impact on the ice extent growth is negligible......Since the recent greatest "2018-2016 Arctic sea ice extent" gap of 1.5+ million square kilometers, the gap has been decreasing, now to just 1.0+ million square kilometers. Present 2018 High Arctic atmospheric temperatures aren't as high as the same period in 2016, which would NOT explain the present narrowing between 2018 & 2016.2018 Arctic sea ice extent has reduced to the level of the average of the 2010's AND continues reducing the gap to 2016, now only ~ 0.6 million square kilometers greater.
First, I've always referred to no local temperatures outside the High Arctic. My references have always been of average temperatures over the High Arctic which is almost 4 million square miles surrounding the North Pole. Second, since you mention 20C above normal while referring to my posts, you must mean the 2016 early December anomalous temperature.
November 30 - December 5.The Kara ice was thrown back big time, which explains the sharp extent slowdown/contraction. Once this process stops, Kara will have room for quick growth again, in addition to Hudson, and we will have another period of above average gains.
Eventually HB and Kara will freeze - but all forecasts seem to agree on more of the same, temps way above average over both areas, with southerlies particularly strong over Kara but also significant over the Hudson.Ya its really warm over Hudson Bay...
So the race is on for the end of month ranking!
Were you thinking of flying there in a balloon? I've never understood your fixation with the 850Hp temperature, that's not where the ice freezes, but 1.5 km further down. But, yes, it is bloody cold in the Hudson at the moment and freezing has picked up again.Eventually HB and Kara will freeze - but all forecasts seem to agree on more of the same, temps way above average over both areas, with southerlies particularly strong over Kara but also significant over the Hudson.Ya its really warm over Hudson Bay...
So the race is on for the end of month ranking!
December 3-8.With the Kara continuing to be blown back, seemingly the same wind regime has been pushing Chukchi ice into growth mode, and CAB ice into Fram export, thus achieving slightly above average growth.
"With the Kara continuing to be blown back". If it was only wind causing the ice front to retreat, surely one would see greater compaction. Looking at Aluminium's gif, there are signs of reduced compaction. Perhaps ocean heat transport is also having an effect (i.e. some of the extent loss is actually melt) ?December 3-8.With the Kara continuing to be blown back, seemingly the same wind regime has been pushing Chukchi ice into growth mode, and CAB ice into Fram export, thus achieving slightly above average growth.
I repeat my prediction that once the Kara process revereses, as it evntually will, we will see oversized extent gains - at least for a few days.
(https://3c1703fe8d.site.internapcdn.net/newman/csz/news/800/2018/suddenstrato.jpg)
Though not especially rare in some parts of the Arctic, the north Greenland polynya of February 2018 was most unexpected. 50,000 km² of open water in the Wandel Sea, an area the size of the state of Kentucky or the province of Nova Scotia.
... In their paper, What caused the remarkable February 2018 Greenland Polynya? (https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/2018GL080902), Moore, Schweiger, Jinlun Zhang and Mike Steele identify the polynya's cause to be strong surface winds catalyzed by a dramatic warming in Earth's upper atmosphere known as a Sudden Stratospheric Warming.
"During these events, temperatures in the stratosphere – about 30km above ground level—can warm by 10° or 15°C in just a few days," Moore says.
"This causes a change in air circulation that includes a reversal in the winds in the stratosphere. These high altitude winds blow against the west-to-east direction of the jet stream, descending toward the Earth's surface. In February 2018, this caused winds from Siberia to blow cold air into northern Europe, creating a weather system that became known as the 'Beast from the East'. It brought temperatures of minus 20°C to northern Europe, and the same weather pattern moved warmer air northwards up the east coast of Greenland."
Strong southerly winds forced mild air to Greenland and beyond, but it wasn't their warmth that caused the polynya.
"Most Arctic warmings last a day or two," says Moore. "This lasted a week, and these were the warmest temperatures and strongest winds observed in north Greenland since observations began in the 1960s. Winds were close to hurricane force (93+km/h) and temperatures were above freezing. Once we got that piece of the puzzle, we realized it could be wind rather than warmth that caused the polynya."
While the size of the polynya was unprecedented over the period we have good data, it appears not to be tied to the thinning of the ice pack that has occurred over the same period. Simulations with the University of Washington's Pan-Arctic Ocean Modeling and Assimilation System (PIOMAS) indicate that similar conditions would have created a polynya, even without the recent thinning of the ice north of Greenland.
G. W. K. Moore et al. What caused the remarkable February 2018 North Greenland Polynya? (https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/2018GL080902), Geophysical Research Letters (2018)
Abstract:
During late February and early March 2018, an unusual polynya was observed off the north coast of Greenland. This period was also notable for the occurrence of a sudden stratospheric warming (SSW). Here we use satellite and in‐situ data, a reanalysis and an ice‐ocean model to document the evolution of the polynya and its synoptic forcing. We show that its magnitude was unprecedented and that it was associated with the transient response to the SSW leading to anomalous warm southerly flow in north Greenland. Indeed, regional wind speeds and temperatures were the highest during February going back to the 1960s. There is evidence that the thinning sea ice has increased its wind‐driven mobility. However, we show that the polynya would have developed under thicker ice conditions representative of the late 1970s and that even with the predicted trend towards thinner sea ice, it will only open during enhanced southerly flow.
Plain Language Summary:
In late February 2018, satellite imagery revealed the presence of a large polynya (a region of reduced sea ice cover within the pack), in the Wandel Sea off the north coast of Greenland. Since this region is not known for the development of polynyas, this discovery generated interest among Arctic observers and in the science community, raising questions about the nature and cause of this unusual event. In this paper, we show that its opening coincided with a period of sustained and unusually warm winds from the south, with above‐freezing temperatures and wind speeds in excess of 25 m/s reported at local weather stations. February 2018 was also notable for a Sudden Stratospheric Warming event, in which an abrupt warming of the atmosphere between 10‐50 km altitude occurred in conjunction with a reversal of the stratospheric winds. We show this event was responsible for the polynya. We also use a computer model to confirm the dominant role of the winds in creating the polynya. Finally, we show that even with future thinning of sea ice due to climate change, extreme winds will remain necessary to create a polynya in this region over the next few decades.
December 6-11.And the Kara has stopped shrinking.
The Chukchi Sea is freezing.
In fact the entire Atlantic front + Kara seems to be increasing.December 6-11.And the Kara has stopped shrinking.
The Chukchi Sea is freezing.
In fact the entire Atlantic front + Kara seems to be increasing.That's one way of describing it. Worldview link, https://tinyurl.com/y6wyep2b
Chukchi might be icing over in the next week or two if the GFS extended forecast holds decently true.The GFS *always* overestimates cold over the highly saline SSTs up north, and does the inverse for the fresh SSTs to their south (Kara, HB). I would be this is another false alarm. The model bias is systemic and incorrigible...!
Per CIS, the Parry Channel is mobile again.Thank you Brigantine. Mclure Strait looks frozen but there is movement further south.
Also, there's this one ARGO float sitting in the warm current NE of Svaalbard (~82N 39E).
It's taking profiles every day, and it's quite Atlantified there.
Chukchi is on course to be iced over by this weekend.
I think we can make a pretty good guesstimate already for how the freezing season will pan out:
The Laptev Sea freeze will be several weeks delayed. This may be countered (not in effect, but in extent measurements) by an early freeze in the Hudson Bay.
The Chukchi Sea will likely be the real story (which will probably lead into Bering Sea anomalies as well). The delays will probably be record setting.
ESS, Beaufort, and CAA will probably be quicker to freeze than in recent years.
Barents and Kara have non-impressive SST anomalies but currently the ice edge is very far away. Likely nothing too interesting.
The other seas may change weather patterns but I don't think have a direct or predictable effect on the arctic, so I don't really care.
Agree, disagree?
Agree, disagree?
I agree with that summation.
Only comment i would make is that maybe,if synoptic weather patterns play ball with an anticyclonic block to the northern Chukchi, that it might not be a record breaking late freeze up in the Chukchi.
The Beaufort seems to be advancing well and if there was persistent easterlies this would gradually cool down the very high Chukchi SSTs. There is a long way to go though, admittedly.
Of course Chukchi may still be bombarded with warm southerlies , like last winter, so will wait and see.
Overall this freezing season has been sluggish.Much of that sluggish appearance is due to average high temperatures in the High Arctic. But that doesn't mean weather conditions have NOT been changing. Along with southern warm fronts moving into the High Arctic, cold fronts from Canada & Greenland have also been intermittently leaking into the Arctic & High Arctic. Presently, a mix of high pressure systems in the High Arctic, surrounded by a series of low pressure systems further south, seem to assure that cold & warm fronts will continue their High Arctic contention for the next week or so.
When did Chukchi ice over last year?
Uniquorn that is the most superb animation. Thank you.
When did Chukchi ice over last year?
We'll see if this temporary excess freezing continues.
We'll see if this temporary excess freezing continues.
If it isn't an artifact.
Lately 2018 Arctic sea ice extent has been paralleling seasonal daily ice extents for past years. Now in one day, 2018 sea ice extent jumped 260,000 km2 & is 160,000 km2 greater than even the 2010's average sea ice extent. 2018 High Arctic temperatures did drop by 2+degC over the last few days, but in addition, several cold regions coinciding with Arctic sea ice edge freezing are in place. We'll see if this temporary excess freezing continues.///////
If it isn't an artifact.
Casual correction: an artifact is something Indiana Jones finds. Artefact is an artificial product or effect observed in a natural system, especially one introduced by the technology used in scientific investigation or by experimental error.
Notice: Sea ice concentration: Data problem Dec 16, 2018
There is a gap of about 14 hours in the data for Dec 16, therefore the sea ice concentration data of Dec 16 are incomplete, In addition, apparently one swath had corrupted data, causing strange values in the Greenland Sea and Barents Sea. We will reprocess as soon as the data are complete.
False color from December 15 and 17 - just from eyeballing I would have guessed a small drop.
I can't see where 300k came from.This is definitely strange.
JAXA ANTARCTIC Sea Ice Extent - 8,852,289 km2（December 17, 2018）
Extent loss of 428k , 181k greater than average on this day.
Lately 2018 Arctic sea ice extent has been paralleling seasonal daily ice extents for past years. Now in one day, 2018 sea ice extent jumped 260,000 km2 & is 160,000 km2 greater than even the 2010's average sea ice extent. 2018 High Arctic temperatures did drop by 2+degC over the last few days, but in addition, several cold regions coinciding with Arctic sea ice edge freezing are in place. We'll see if this temporary excess freezing continues.///////
Quoted by Neven:
litesong on December 17, 2018, 06:18:43 PM We'll see if this temporary excess freezing continues.
/////
Neven wrote:
If it isn't an artifact.
///////
litesong wrote:
Into the second day, the 2018 excess freezing settles down, but still increased, compared to 2010's daily sea ice average, from 160,000 km2 to 200,000 km2. As stated previously, severe cooling along Arctic sea ice edges may account for the present 2018 jumpy sea ice increase.
I think it's a consolidation taking place after the recent new moon and the lows driving winds and tides, all the periphery was disrupted and freezing slowed, now it's back on track. Wouldn't have predicted this 'recovery' of impetus but it's not that surprising, winters coming.
Artefact is an artificial product or effect observed in a natural system, especially one introduced by the technology used in scientific investigation or by experimental error.Two days ago, after Arctic sea ice extent had been paralleling other years of Arctic sea ice rise in the Arctic fall & winter darkness, I noted JAXA Arctic sea ice extent datum JUMPED 260,000 km2 in one day, rising dramatically above the general seasonal Arctic sea ice increase. Neven, immediately posted that the JAXA data gathering might be at fault. Other long time followers of Arctic conditions, agreed that the one day datum might be suspect.
AMSR2 regional data anomalies for today's dateNice graph. I think the absolute anomaly in km2 is okay, I don't see it as biased.
(2018- 2012->2018 mean)
I couldn't figure out a good way to normalise this to area-of-the-sea-of-interest so there is a bias in the size of the bars to some extent.
Agreed. The ice north and north east of Svalbard looks fragile. The wind is forecast to change jan2.
amsr2-uhh, atlantic front,dec24-31
I think I see evidence of melt all along the edge from Franz Josef to Svalbard. You can see large ice flows on the leading edge breaking up and disintegrating. What are the SST's here?There is a fairly thin line of Sea Surface Temperatures, between the island groups, that are warmer than normal, ~ 4(?) degC. I'm just looking at the Northern Hemisphere, so its not high resolution.
Happy (WACCy) New Year....
There's a major SSW- Event underway, gonna split the Polar Vortex into bits.
There's a major SSW- Event underway
https://www.aer.com/science-research/climate-weather/arctic-oscillation/
There's a major SSW- Event underway
Judah Cohen's article on the topic:
https://www.aer.com/science-research/climate-weather/arctic-oscillation/
It's going to be a snowy January in the NH continents, in many areas of mid-high latitudes. Dec 2018 ended with average snow cover per Rutgers lab, expect a ramp up for the next month or so.
Anything to expect over the Arctic proper? Effects of past SSWs in Jan/Feb were very disappointing in any aspect apart from some spectacular cracks due to the ensuing anticyclone.
Edit: this anticyclone is predicted by ECMWF to appear at 1040s hPa early next week and linger at that level for three or four days, while it gets colder in Europe and North America
December 27 - January 3.
I guess we need to be analyzing in 4D here.
This Cold leaving the Fridge now, will be very much missing in Spring/ Summer in the NH.
Last Season we had summer Temps from 8th April til first Week of November, with very little Precipitation. This Year's gonna be more of a Scorcher.
What is that prediction based on? The Farmer's Almanac or Old Farmer's Almanac? :)
Unfortunately, as a result of the partial government shutdown, we are unable to access the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) pages to retrieve information on atmospheric air temperatures and sea level pressure patterns. Instead, we turn to daily (2 meters above the surface) mean air temperatures north of 80 degrees North from the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) operational model. This analysis shows that air temperatures remained above the 1958 to 2002 average for all of December (Figure 2b)
Indeed, and I believe some of the push back is actually strong melt, as evidenced by movement of coarse features compared to the speed of retreat, especially on the last frame.agreed. Polarview, svalbard, this morning. Sorry, not much ice in this image, mostly wind blown slush. https://www.polarview.aq/arctic for more images.
The Atlantic is fighting back.
946 hPa right now.957949hPa cyclone gfs forecast for thursday
Pretty sure that's not ice round Jan Mayen. Dense cloud perhaps. Some goodbye waves visible to the far left of the polarview image.
Shame, would have spurred some interesting reading had it happened.thanks for the research :) It's unlikely that this year's mostly first year ice is up to the job. Waves are over 3m today, forecast for over 4m tomorrow.
Forgive my naivety.
According to The Economist today:
"America’s government shutdown has become the longest in history. Hundreds of thousands of federal workers remain either stuck at home or forced to work without pay."
and according to the Polar Science Center at the University of Washington:
"Due to the US Government Shutdown, PIOMAS ice volume and thickness data which depend on federal government generated reanalysis products, are currently not updated."
The Vortex is Toast...
Get Ready for a Scorcher
The Vortex is Toast...
I'd noticed that too:
http://GreatWhiteCon.info/2019/01/facts-about-the-arctic-in-january-2019/#Vortex-Jan-13QuoteGet Ready for a Scorcher
Time will tell!
January 6-13.Not sure what makes amsr2 detect large floes as lower concentration than the 'glue ice' in between. Snowdrifts?
Just bumped into another one (https://www.ilmeteo.it/notizie/meteo-pauroso-riscaldamento-del-polo-nord-ecco-perch-rischia-litalia-entro-fine-inverno-stratwarming), this time from the main Italian forecaster. For those who don't read Italian, the main points are: "Polar vortex in pieces" is the caption plastered across the image, and further down: "Looking at the analysis map one notices that the coming days will see a very strong warming of the stratosphere, one of the strongest of the last 30 years, on par with or stronger than the one in 1985, in fact canging from -75 to -10 degrees, a crazy jump in temperatures of 65 degrees."Google translate does very well with Italian. It seems the Italians are saying that the SSW that has just happened is likely to be followed with an even stronger one. I shall be keeping an eye on this from http://ds.data.jma.go.jp/tcc/tcc/products/clisys/STRAT/ (a website of the Japan meteorology agency).
Google translate does very well with Italian. It seems the Italians are saying that the SSW that has just happened is likely to be followed with an even stronger one. I shall be keeping an eye on this from http://ds.data.jma.go.jp/tcc/tcc/products/clisys/STRAT/ (a website of the Japan meteorology agency).
Current ECMWF op run, which stretches out to Jan 26th, shows no northern blocking over the North Atlantic.Not that I know the first thing about SSW but the weather in Europe has been pretty wild these last few weeks, with extreme cold reaching all the way down to North Africa, massive amounts of snow in the Alps and elsewhere in central/western Europe, while Iceland had temperatures that would have been more normal in summer than winter, with practically no snow (although that has changed drastically in the last few days).
For western Europe, going by these charts, the impact of the late December SSW is quite minimal.