I think it is time to open it.
I think it is time to open it.
It is now, one month later.
The ESS cools but it still warmer in general. At this point I don't expect quickly extent increase in September. The peripheral seas will be ready to freeze in mid-October likely. But it need the heat advection to repeat the 2016 pattern. Also the land snow cover extent is now about normal despite some early snowfalls in SiberiaAgreed, the persistent anticyclone that is about to end has kept the ice nicely compacted, at the same time it has precipitated the refreezing inside the pack due to heat loss (reason why Gero observed as anomalous a week of extent drops coexisting with same week of area increases).
Changing over on the equinox as we are seems highly appropriate (even if it would have been a little early last year)
Why is there always a race to be the person who gets to start one of these threads?
I agree with John Adams, then. It explains much about human nature, and our individual and collective behaviour eg towards our planet. There are some profound philosophies that agree also.... but I am already too OT for that here... I return to being the hero of my own dream...Why is there always a race to be the person who gets to start one of these threads?
John Adams believed that the number one motive of human nature is not benevolence or a commitment to justice, but rather what he called the "rage for distinction." According to Adams, each of us insists on being the hero of his (or her) narrative.
Why is there always a race to be the person who gets to start one of these threads?
John Adams believed that the number one motive of human nature is not benevolence or a commitment to justice, but rather what he called the "rage for distinction." According to Adams, each of us insists on being the hero of his (or her) narrative.
Hearts in the Ice is a platform for social engagement around climate change, started by Hilde Fålun Strøm and Sunniva Sorby. It is a 9-month overwintering project in the High Arctic of Svalbard, Norway. Starting in August 2019 Hilde (Norway) and Sunniva (Canada) will inhabit the 20 sq mtr trappers cabin “Bamsebu”- 78’N. They will be the first women to over-winter in Svalbard "without men".
The project will serve as a platform for global dialogue and engagement concerning the changes we are experiencing in the Polar Regions which impacts the world and what we all, individually, might be able to do about it. Life at Bamsebu will be broadcast and published via Iridium satellite through social media to scientists, school children, adventurers, and interested citizens from around the world.
As the freezing season begins, here are some relevant things to track...Thanks Oren!
* DMI's Temps north of 80o, which although does not give a proper average and is highly biased towards the pole, still gives some comparison with past years and some indication of how bad (warm) winter is. Besides, it could drive A-Team to resume posting just to say how useless it is.
The end of the Arctic sea ice melt season is nigh. The last couple of weeks have seen small rises and falls in ice extent, primarily due to changes in wind patterns. However, falling temperatures will soon accelerate the pace of ice growth.
Arctic sea ice extent was 4.21 million square kilometers (1.62 million square miles) on September 16, which is likely near the seasonal minimum extent that is expected within the next week.
However based on Wipneus' numbers I have no doubt Neven was right to open this thread!I think so too, especially with cyclones showing up again that most likely will disperse some of the ice that isn't frozen solid yet.
Besides, it could drive A-Team to resume posting just to say how useless it is.
Besides, it could drive A-Team to resume posting just to say how useless it is.
;D Which would benefit us all.
The land snow cover extent back to its normal values. The snowfalls and heat wave are on Greenland now. I will pay attention to the snow tracking because it will be important next melt season
I disagree.The land snow cover extent back to its normal values. The snowfalls and heat wave are on Greenland now. I will pay attention to the snow tracking because it will be important next melt season
I've seen a lot of debate about this, the consensus here is that continental snow doesn't really have much bearing on Arctic sea-ice. Recently (2017, 2018) the snow mass charts have gone off the scale in winter (ECCC had to make a new y-axis) and it really hasn't correlated with a change in Arctic sea ice melt.
Image to stay on-topic; ice formation in most sectors, but a bit of contraction in the western Laptev
I disagree.
The amount of snow cover on land is not very important until spring, especially late spring in May and June, as that determines the timing of when snow melt begins over the Arctic sea ice.The land snow cover extent back to its normal values. The snowfalls and heat wave are on Greenland now. I will pay attention to the snow tracking because it will be important next melt season
I've seen a lot of debate about this, the consensus here is that continental snow doesn't really have much bearing on Arctic sea-ice. Recently (2017, 2018) the snow mass charts have gone off the scale in winter (ECCC had to make a new y-axis) and it really hasn't correlated with a change in Arctic sea ice melt.
I wonder if we will see ice return to the north shores of Svalbard this winter? That region seems to be almost unaffected by the changing seasons, with ice cover being almost entirely determined by the strength and warmth of the West Spitsbergen Current.
I disagree.
I agree with you! See #5:
http://GreatWhiteCon.info/2019/05/melt-pond-may-2019/
How does snow influence the freezing season? How much does it have to snow to insulate the ice from refreezing?
The "slush floes" that dominated large parts of the CAB (facing the Laptev and the Beaufort) managed to survive thanks to the poor melting weather in August. This saved the melting season, but also gave a jumpstart to the freezing season, as cold fresh water intermixed with spread floes can freeze very quickly. Thus the very quick rise in area in the CAB. The CAA has seen a similarly quick refreeze around the surviving ice. Now that this process is (probably) over, it's gonna be mighty interesting. I expect a relatively slow refreeze especially in the ESS and Chukchi, as this summer they have been ice free longer than usual, giving the surface water time to heat and especially to mix.
I've seen a lot of debate about this, the consensus here is that continental snow doesn't really have much bearing on Arctic sea-ice. Recently (2017, 2018) the snow mass charts have gone off the scale in winter (ECCC had to make a new y-axis) and it really hasn't correlated with a change in Arctic sea ice melt.
Yes! Extra snowcover also has the impact of aiding -500MB anomalies in the continents, with ensuing cold blasts into the mid-latitude oceans a particularly potent method of advecting additional oceanic heat into the Arctic. Continental snowfall is good from the perspective of blunting incoming warmth to the Arctic that would originate from the continents, it is bad from the perspective that -500MB anomalies are effective at evacuating mid-latitude oceanic heat northwards, into the Arctic.
I've seen a lot of debate about this, the consensus here is that continental snow doesn't really have much bearing on Arctic sea-ice. Recently (2017, 2018) the snow mass charts have gone off the scale in winter (ECCC had to make a new y-axis) and it really hasn't correlated with a change in Arctic sea ice melt.
More snow = more sunlight reflected = cooling. But the best way to get a wider cover of snow on the continents adjacent to the Arctic is to disrupt the polar vortex and allow more cold arctic air to spread further away from the central Arctic, meaning the central Arctic becomes warmer.
Can anyone verify AAM is dropping
AAM may refer to:
Academy of Ancient Music, a period-instrument orchestra based in Cambridge, England
Accademia di Architettura di Mendrisio
Active appearance model, a method for image detection, using statistical models
Air-to-air missile, a missile fired from an aircraft to attack another aircraft
Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers
American Alliance of Museums, an organization for museums and associated individuals
American Axle & Manufacturing, a supplier of automotive components
Al-Aqsa Mosque
Anti-Apartheid Movement
Aramanik language, an extinct language of Tanzania, ISO 639-3 designation
Association of Assistant Mistresses, a former British trade union
The US Army Achievement Medal, awarded for meritorious service or achievement
ASCII Adjust after Multiplication, computer instruction in Intel BCD opcodes#Multiplication
Automatic acoustic management, a technology to reduce hard drive seek noise
Mala Mala Airport in South Africa (IATA airport code: AAM)
Aam, a hamlet in the Netherlands
Alliance for Audited Media
The Association for Accessible Medicines, formerly known as the Generic Pharmaceutical Association (GPhA)
More snow = more sunlight reflected = cooling.
More snow = more sunlight reflected = cooling.
Not cooling but less or later warming, that's not the same.
Cooling would happen if temps would generally be lower than before but as they are generally higher (AGW!) we have reduced/later/ warming over snow covered area than over not snow covered area.
More snow = more sunlight reflected = cooling.
Not cooling but less or later warming, that's not the same.
Cooling would happen if temps would generally be lower than before but as they are generally higher (AGW!) we have reduced/later/ warming over snow covered area than over not snow covered area.
The biggest problem with more snow is that it makes it harder for the permafrost to refreeze, and that would lead to warmer landmass during summer, and more methane in the air.
That's probably the better explanation of my simplified version.
More snow = more sunlight reflected = cooling.
Not cooling but less or later warming, that's not the same.
Cooling would happen if temps would generally be lower than before but as they are generally higher (AGW!) we have reduced/later/ warming over snow covered area than over not snow covered area.
The biggest problem with more snow is that it makes it harder for the permafrost to refreeze, and that would lead to warmer landmass during summer, and more methane in the air.
Early snow traps heat in the ground and in the ice. Instead of the surface being able to radiate heat directly to and through the atmosphere (say - 40°C) it has to conduct the heat through all those nice air pockets in the snow. On sea ice it would effectively lower the number of FDDs
Early snow = slows down heat loss (insulator)
Late snow = slows down heat gain (albedo, specific heat of melt to overcome before ice and ground heat up, insulator)
Of course and model would depend on the latitude and time of year
Buckle up for October,<snippage>Refreeze may be a bit slower
The wind has some say in this.Yes, significant wind dispersion. unihamburg amsr2-uhh view of it, sep20-27. Cold there so the leads are likely to refreeze.
Despite the persistent HP and lack of heat advection the high Arctic temperatures track near record warm levelsFDDs in 2016-17 were a record low.
There's a lot going on above the pea green soup of the Laptev.Are those algue a reoccurring event? It looks really green up there...
When in bloom
These activity phases are determined by the abundance of sunlight and nitrates. As surface waters warm in the spring, they become less dense and less prone to mixing with the colder water below. Relatively heavy pieces of organic matter begin to sink, creating a nutrient maximum a couple of meters below the surface. Springtime sunlight and sub-surface nutrients drove the phytoplankton out from underneath the ice into the open water during the warmer months, behavior the scientists expected to see. What makes these results surprising is the relative rate of production of the activity phases: summer was not found to be the productive season for phytoplankton in the Greenland Sea. Most of the annual production occurred in equal parts under the ice and at the ice’s edge, with a much smaller contribution coming from summertime open-water blooms. Late winter and spring are therefore the most fruitful seasons for phytoplankton, a departure from the traditional school of thought on Arctic algae blooms. Without the Biogeochemical-Argo floats’ year-round data collection, this fact would have gone unrealized.
Climate change
It is especially important to have correct measurements of phytoplankton biomass and production in the face of climate change, since any estimation of future algal activity demands an accurate starting point. The Greenland Sea is already responding to new climatic pressures: warmer temperatures lead to thinner ice and melt pools, which are dark pools of water on top of the ice. Sea ice that is thin and wet has a lower albedo than normal sea ice, so the Greenland Sea is absorbing more solar radiation and heating at an accelerating rate. Increased solar radiation also makes the Greenland SIZ more hospitable for sub-ice algae blooms, which serve to darken the ice and perpetuate warming even further. The positive feedback loop becomes even more dire in light of Mayot et al.’s findings. Phytoplankton underneath and at the edge of the sea ice—now known to be the Greenland Sea’s most lucrative producers—are most susceptible to the effects of decreasing ice thickness. Higher initial counts of those populations suggest an even more drastic amplification of algae blooms and their associated effects.
It's weird that this is happening right now, at the start of the dark season. It's like they're all coming out from underneath the ice to suck up the last rays of sunlight. Can the refreezing and the release of salt have something to do with this?Winds have been very strong, and the North side of Svalbard is a lane where warmer saltier water circulates from the Atlantic, so that is a strong factor not in favor of ice coming back to the islands. But if strong winds turn direction it may do.
It's weird that this is happening right now, at the start of the dark season. It's like they're all coming out from underneath the ice to suck up the last rays of sunlight. Can the refreezing and the release of salt have something to do with this?I think my first comment in thi Forum was about this. What is first the chicken or the egg?
Edit; or is this just the reflection of the low sun on the clouds?
Actually the persistence of ice reaching as South as Svalbard has been weird in summer.Yes, that was something that I was curious about, why the ice edge on the Barents and Kara sea didn't move all that much over summer, especially because of all that warm salty water.
What is first the chicken or the egg?The egg came first. A proto chicken laid an egg with a small change in the DNA that made it the first chicken.
Yes, that was something that I was curious about, why the ice edge on the Barents and Kara sea didn't move all that much over summer, especially because of all that warm salty water.
Well, there are internal factors, as the sinking force caused by ice presence dictates current flow, but depending where’s the ice is, the flow strength fluctuates, with some delay effect as massive currents have lots of inertia, right? delay is the kind of thing that easily causes intrinsic pseudo cyclical behavior even in absence of external weather or flow fluctuations.What is first the chicken or the egg?The egg came first. A proto chicken laid an egg with a small change in the DNA that made it the first chicken.
Ice was driven over months towards the islands and piled up against them due to ice-drift.So those 3 island groups are basically preventing the ice from drifting too much into the hot salty waters of the Kara and Barents sea? It's a weird situation there, because the hot salty water seems to stay on the other side of the islands as well.
Let me know when you stay away from the pot and the drinks for long enough.I try to restrict my drinking to ones every 2 weeks, but when I drink, I drink hard, and I can be an ashole sometimes when I'm in a bad mood...
I wonder if the slowdown of the Gulfstream has something to do with the lack of ice loss on that side...
Let's not forget that even though there may be a slow down, the waters are warmer i general, hence one would have to carefully calculate which effect is overruling the other.I found this article. Interesting read!
When the current is faster, more of the warm, salty tropical water travels to the North Atlantic. Over years this causes more glaciers to melt, and eventually the freshwater makes the surface water lighter and less likely to sink, slowing the current.https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/07/180718131128.htm
When the AMOC is in a slow phase, the North Atlantic becomes cooler, ice melt slows, and eventually the freshwater melt source dries up and the heavier saltier water can plunge down again, which speeds up the whole circulation.
Recent high-tech tracking of the AMOC itself to suggest that its strength fluctuates as part of a roughly 60- to 70-year, self-reinforcing cycle.
A key question for climate scientists in recent years has been whether the Atlantic Ocean's main circulation system is slowing down, a development that could have dramatic consequences for Europe and other parts of the Atlantic rim. But a new study suggests help may be on the way from an unexpected source -- the Indian Ocean.
...
The researchers said their modeling indicates a series of cascading effects that stretch from the Indian Ocean all way over to the Atlantic: As the Indian Ocean warms faster and faster, it generates additional precipitation. This, in turn, draws more air from other parts of the world, including the Atlantic, to the Indian Ocean.
With so much precipitation in the Indian Ocean, there will be less precipitation in the Atlantic Ocean, the researchers said. Less precipitation will lead to higher salinity in the waters of the tropical portion of the Atlantic -- because there won't be as much rainwater to dilute it. This saltier water in the Atlantic, as it comes north via AMOC, will get cold much quicker than usual and sink faster.
"This would act as a jump-start for AMOC, intensifying the circulation,"
"This would act as a jump-start for AMOC, intensifying the circulation,"Why did you leave out the next sentence?
"This would act as a jump-start for AMOC, intensifying the circulation," Fedorov said. "On the other hand, we don't know how long this enhanced Indian Ocean warming will continue. If other tropical oceans' warming, especially the Pacific, catches up with the Indian Ocean, the advantage for AMOC will stop."I also think that the melting Greenland ice cap will produce a lot more fresh water to dilute that saltier ocean water than rain. But that's just MHO...
Why did you leave out the next sentence?
Isn't there a thread about the AMOC yet?
Because the question was "is there a consensus?".And I think the answer is yes. There is a consensus that something is going on with the AMOC. A lot of research will still need to be done to find out exactly what, but I guess we can agree that if there's a slowdown of the AMOC, that this could be a reason why the ice on the Atlantic side isn't melting as fast as the other parts of the arctic ocean. Is that a reasonable compromise?
I wonder if it has anything to do with the AMOC.That's what I always thought. I thought that maybe the AMOC changed its path a little somehow, and is now bumping into Svalbard, causing it to rise to the surface, heating it up.
I wonder if it has anything to do with the AMOC.That's what I always thought. I thought that maybe the AMOC changed its path a little somehow, and is now bumping into Svalbard, causing it to rise to the surface, heating it up.
... but I guess we can agree that if there's a slowdown of the AMOC, that this could be a reason why the ice on the Atlantic side isn't melting as fast as the other parts of the arctic ocean. Is that a reasonable compromise?
... but I guess we can agree that if there's a slowdown of the AMOC, that this could be a reason why the ice on the Atlantic side isn't melting as fast as the other parts of the arctic ocean. Is that a reasonable compromise?
Sorry mate, my pet theory is quasi the opposite. ;)
IMHO there is an Atlantification of the Arctic going on. We see Atlantic water go as far as the ESS.
The research, published in Nature Climate Change, finds that warming conditions and decreasing sea ice volume “may soon” see the Barents Sea complete a transition from cold, fresh Arctic waters to a warm, salty Atlantic regime.
If current trends continue, the transition could occur “around 2040”, the lead author tells Carbon Brief. This would have “unknown consequences” for the wider ecosystem and commercial fishing, the study warns.
Edit; im aware that its very unlikely this is actually a real SSTA value,
ASIF members, bookmark it !
Sorry mate, my pet theory is quasi the opposite. ;)It looks like Gerontocrat's graphs spell doom for my AMOC slowdown theory... :(
IMHO there is an Atlantification of the Arctic going on. We see Atlantic water go as far as the ESS.
Great explanation John, but why this persistence? A decadal swing in the location of these vortices or forcing due to sea ice changes?Well I'm only guessing but it seems that as Atl. waters penetrate deeper into the Arctic more Arctic waters are forced out, whether on the surface or close to the deepest level. The loss of Barentz sea ice seems to be a key factor, so I assume the complex surface it once presented to tidal currents acted as a baffle, this gone allows a smoother inflow which in turn accelerates penetration. I've said elsewhere that it seems that currents are residuals of tidal flows and that currents on the scale we're examining appear to flow like slime bodies So with more Atl. waters induced north in the general run of things only to be frustrated in their passage by particular circumstances we see persitent anomolies that wax and wane, related [i think] to the forcing of more variable surface outflows.
What if the Barents is warming because the slowdown of the AMOC - and probably other factors - causes it to rise more to the surface - hence the hotspot west of Svalbard - and thus instead of the hot Atlantic water sinking to the deepest parts of the Arctic, it stays high, and heats up the Barents?
Some people who seem to like posting pet theories here about the AMOC seem to lack the most basic understanding of how it works.Isn't this a place to gain more knowledge?
Some people who seem to like posting pet theories here about the AMOC seem to lack the most basic understanding of how it works.Isn't this a place to gain more knowledge?
Last 24h + Five day ForecastThe colder temperatures exactly where the ice pack is. It's about a week until the inner basin should start to refreeze very quickly. But we'll see how it will go this year since it was the highest AWP in summer this year
October 2 - 8
Wind + Temp @ Surface + Total Cloud Water
gaining more knowledge can be done by reading the past .. your lack of knowledge could be overcome readily .
As you well know I cannot afford your continual delivery of self-loading mp4's .
Free(grr)ass .. gaining more knowledge can be done by reading the past .. your lack of knowledge could be overcome readily . AMOC and Svalbard's ghost hotspot have been frequent topics of discussion .
nothing new has been added to the debate in several years .. just new posters repeating .
I usually avoid this thread now .. after multiple visits daily since 2013 . Thank you ! As you well know I cannot afford your continual delivery of self-loading mp4's .
Lorenzo has dropped by (N. Ireland ) .. wind and rain steadily increasing . A lot of L's energy is heading toward the Arctic , mostly via Greenland . Temps are forecast to briefly reach >0'C at the pole in a few days.
Those last few days record low ice days from 2007 look like being replaced by 2019 later this month .
b.c.
Free(grr)ass .. gaining more knowledge can be done by reading the past .. your lack of knowledge could be overcome readily . AMOC and Svalbard's ghost hotspot have been frequent topics of discussion .
nothing new has been added to the debate in several years .. just new posters repeating .
I usually avoid this thread now .. after multiple visits daily since 2013 . Thank you ! As you well know I cannot afford your continual delivery of self-loading mp4's .
It's only normal that when a forum like this grows, that people will show up that haven't had the privilege to study the arctic for multiple years. When you tell people like that to go away, they will, and this forum will stay small.Free(grr)ass .. gaining more knowledge can be done by reading the past .. your lack of knowledge could be overcome readily . AMOC and Svalbard's ghost hotspot have been frequent topics of discussion .
nothing new has been added to the debate in several years .. just new posters repeating .
I usually avoid this thread now .. after multiple visits daily since 2013 . Thank you ! As you well know I cannot afford your continual delivery of self-loading mp4's .
I agree. It's admirable to want to learn about these topics but when the discussion here is dominated by those who (to put it kindly) are still in the process of learning, that dilutes the value of this thread which used to be filled by people who knew what they were talking about. There are other places on this forum to ask questions on pet theories or learn the basics.
Meanwhile over 90% of the increased energy trapped by rising CO2 ppm is going into the oceans, and the North Atlantic is getting its fair share.What if the Barents is warming because the slowdown of the AMOC - and probably other factors - causes it to rise more to the surface - hence the hotspot west of Svalbard - and thus instead of the hot Atlantic water sinking to the deepest parts of the Arctic, it stays high, and heats up the Barents?
This is an incredibly persistent misconception. The warm Atlantic currents are surface currents. They do not "rise more to the surface" since that's where they are to begin with.
And hot (or warm) water does not sink unless external factors make them sink, of which there are basically two that can operate in tandem:
1) The hot (warm) water cools down on the surface, and due to it's high salt content it ends up sinking.
2) The hot (warm) current meats freshwater and sinks in spite of being warmer, since the salt content makes it heavier.
But then comes the "AMOC is slowing down" hypothesis which is based on increased amounts of fresh water (meltwater from Greenland) diluting the hot (warm) Atlantic surface water and stopping it from sinking!
Since the sinking of the (cooled-down) surface current is thought to be a large driver behind the AMOC (perhaps constituting 1/3 of the total), when less cooled-down water sinks due to lower salinity, the AMOC loses power and starts slowing down.
Meanwhile over 90% of the increased energy trapped by rising CO2 ppm is going into the oceans, and the North Atlantic is getting its fair share.+10 (if that were possible)
The Air temperature in the Arctic is warming at twice the world average.
The Albedo Warming Potential of seas like the Barents which are so much more ice-free much earlier in the melting season is rising quickly - (See the "May June July" line in the graph I attach again).
So my speculation that belongs to me is that a slowing AMOC might slow down the Atlantification of the Barents - (which then advances into the Kara, then the Laptev?) but cannot stop it. Timing - I have neither the maths nor the bank of supercomputers. Got a few hundred million bucks to spare?
The trouble with the ignore button is that I'd rather not remove your or anyone elses posts from my potential viewing . Everyone has something worthwhile to bring at least occasionally ..Let us hope you receive Justice, not The Law.
As I'm up in court for sentencing tomorrow for giving free grass to a number of people with serious medical needs I may not be here for the next 6 months (or even 7 years) .. I am considered a 'persistent offender' having 8 previous convictions for 36 similar offences . These will be taken into account .
just b.c. :)
..
As I'm up in court for sentencing tomorrow for giving free grass to a number of people with serious medical needs I may not be here for the next 6 months (or even 7 years) .. I am considered a 'persistent offender' having 8 previous convictions for 36 similar offences . These will be taken into account .
just b.c. :)
The trouble with the ignore button is that I'd rather not remove your or anyone elses posts from my potential viewing . Everyone has something worthwhile to bring at least occasionally ..So sorry to hear that BC. FreeGrass doesn't mean giving away grass for free. It's just my way of saying "Free The Weed". Freedom for cannabis users. I've been fighting that fight for almost 40 years now, and if I were you, I would tell your lawyer to bring up the "Declaration of Principles on Equality". My conclusion after 40 years is that (illegal) drug users are being discriminated against. Why are deadly hard drugs like alcohol and cigarettes legal, and other, less harmful drugs, illegal? Why doesn't society like me? Because I use a much safer drug than alcohol? You've seen what alcohol can do to me... So the current drug laws are in conflict with the anti-discrimination laws. That's my end conclusion on the drugs debate...
As I'm up in court for sentencing tomorrow for giving free grass to a number of people with serious medical needs I may not be here for the next 6 months (or even 7 years) .. I am considered a 'persistent offender' having 8 previous convictions for 36 similar offences . These will be taken into account .
just b.c. :)
Facts About the Arctic in October 2019
We finally found the piece of ice that will be the home for Polarstern for the next year. It’s a floe a few kilometers in diameter and with thickness ranging from half a meter to a few meters.
Early snow traps heat in the ground and in the ice. Instead of the surface being able to radiate heat directly to and through the atmosphere (say - 40°C) it has to conduct the heat through all those nice air pockets in the snow. On sea ice it would effectively lower the number of FDDs
Early snow = slows down heat loss (insulator)
Late snow = slows down heat gain (albedo, specific heat of melt to overcome before ice and ground heat up, insulator)
Of course and model would depend on the latitude and time of year
So sorry to hear that BC. FreeGrass doesn't mean giving away grass for free. It's just my way of saying "Free The Weed". Freedom for cannabis users. I've been fighting that fight for almost 40 years now, and if I were you, I would tell your lawyer to bring up the "Declaration of Principles on Equality". My conclusion after 40 years is that (illegal) drug users are being discriminated against. Why are deadly hard drugs like alcohol and cigarettes legal, and other, less harmful drugs, illegal? Why doesn't society like me? Because I use a much safer drug than alcohol? You've seen what alcohol can do to me... So the current drug laws are in conflict with the anti-discrimination laws. That's my end conclusion on the drugs debate...
Thanks for the mention B.
As I'm up in court for sentencing tomorrow for giving free grass to a number of people with serious medical needs I may not be here for the next 6 months (or even 7 years) .. I am considered a 'persistent offender' having 8 previous convictions for 36 similar offences . These will be taken into account .
just b.c. :)
I'll have to take over A-Team's position on this venerable board and start posting updates for you all to follow
I'll have to take over A-Team's position on this venerable board and start posting updates for you all to follow
You'll have to do a lot more than that to "take over A-Team's position on this venerable board"!
Mercator (model) SST with unihamburg amsr2-uhh overlay at 60% transparent (0% concentration set to fully transparent) sep24-oct3. click to runSeems to me that Pacific inflow keeps temperatures up at Chukchi and even Beaufort, but the drop at ESS coasts seems ominous. A lot of snow has fallen over East Siberia already. Ice may form near the coast soon.
Warm pacific water still entering the chukchi from the pacific. Atlantic 'battle of the bulge' continues. Refreeze apparently making headway in the Laptev
Seems to me that Pacific inflow keeps temperatures up at Chukchi and even Beaufort, but the drop at ESS coasts seems ominous. A lot of snow has fallen over East Siberia already. Ice may form near the coast soon.
[ADS NIPR VISHOP (JAXA)] Arctic Sea Ice Extent.Prediction, mid-October - 2019 will drop behind 2012 to become consistently lowest extent for date, and will continue to be there through most of the freezing season. I'm expecting a warm winter in the high arctic.
October 4th, 2019:
4,534,324 km2, an increase of 18,749 km2.
2019 is 2nd lowest on record.
(2007, 2012 & 2016 highlighted).
September 26 - October 4.Thank you as always Aluminium.
2018 (https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2413.msg175458.html#msg175458).
Seems to me that Pacific inflow keeps temperatures up at Chukchi and even Beaufort, but the drop at ESS coasts seems ominous. A lot of snow has fallen over East Siberia already. Ice may form near the coast soon.
You're not suggesting that ice forming in the ESS soon is ominous are you? It became ice free very early and now shows that it will be freezing very late.
I suspect I have misunderstood you. What is ominous is how long the ESS is ice free,
Still trying to understand how the *warmest* August on record, according to awesome +70N 925hPa temps chart produced by Zack Labe, led to such a poor loss of ice extent. No convincing explanation so far. We don’t know an iota of what’s going on apart from the inexorable warming.
Still trying to understand how the *warmest* August on record, according to awesome +70N 925hPa temps chart produced by Zack Labe, led to such a poor loss of ice extent. No convincing explanation so far. We don’t know an iota of what’s going on apart from the inexorable warming.
Still trying to understand how the *warmest* August on record, according to awesome +70N 925hPa temps chart produced by Zack Labe, led to such a poor loss of ice extent. No convincing explanation so far. We don’t know an iota of what’s going on apart from the inexorable warming.I am convinced that we had normal melting conditions in 2019. That we only reached the second position because we started very low and because there was a lot of compaction at the end. The Greenland today page of nsidc https://nsidc.org/greenland-today/ also shows an average year. That's something I worry about. What would happen if 2012 conditions would happen again?
2019 was much warmer than 2012Still trying to understand how the *warmest* August on record, according to awesome +70N 925hPa temps chart produced by Zack Labe, led to such a poor loss of ice extent. No convincing explanation so far. We don’t know an iota of what’s going on apart from the inexorable warming.I am convinced that we had normal melting conditions in 2019. That we only reached the second position because we started very low and because there was a lot of compaction at the end. The Greenland today page of nsidc https://nsidc.org/greenland-today/ also shows an average year. That's something I worry about. What would happen if 2012 conditions would happen again?
Still trying to understand how the *warmest* August on record, according to awesome +70N 925hPa temps chart produced by Zack Labe, led to such a poor loss of ice extent. No convincing explanation so far. We don’t know an iota of what’s going on apart from the inexorable warming.
Still trying to understand how the *warmest* August on record, according to awesome +70N 925hPa temps chart produced by Zack Labe, led to such a poor loss of ice extent. No convincing explanation so far....I am convinced that we had normal melting conditions in 2019.
Your answers are good, especially the third.Still trying to understand how the *warmest* August on record, according to awesome +70N 925hPa temps chart produced by Zack Labe, led to such a poor loss of ice extent. No convincing explanation so far....I am convinced that we had normal melting conditions in 2019.
WTF? Normal melting conditions? With warmest August, 2nd warmes June and 3rd warmest July (and it was quite sunny for a good part of the summer as well)? How can you call that normal? Based on temps, ice should have crashed to nil, but it held up very well, so I have the same question as the original poster: i wonder why we did not lose more ice?
My answers are:
- the GAC of 2012 was truly a powerful and rare phenomenon and simple warm weather is not enough to repeat it
- the Central Pack is really hard to crack
- the Arctic is a mystery :)
~Complex system by its vastness, the Arctic atmosphere warmed to #1 despite any clear year to year trend.
~600 mb temperature analysis reveals September 2019 surpassing 2012, despite 2012 having less sea ice at minima.
~Shouldn't 2012 atmosphere have been the warmest one?
Even though 2016 had a similar minimum... it seemed like for a large part of the year we were way ahead of it... Even the 2016 area minimum was only really for a three week period well below this year. It seems we can't judge a year by a minimum... 2007 seemed like a very bad year and 2011 is often in the upper five? Global ice missed 2016 numbers in area but seam to be keeping pace or besting the last two years which were also bad. Global extent is another story... we are definitely looking at records below 2016 at this point.The Global Extent in 2016 fell like a stone from now due to an unprecedented event in the Antarctic which very probably had nothing to do with the Arctic Freezing season. Probably an outlier rather like 2012 in the Arctic. Something extraordinary would have to happen for 2019 to get below 2016 by maximum in early November.
Regardless of the minimum, CAB extent is edging towards the slow refreeze of 2018 (brown), 2012 is orange.Freezing is gonna speed up, people in tweeter talking about alignment and strengthening of tropospheric and stratospheric polar vortices, “cooling the arctic and bringing mild temps to mid latitudes”.
Wipneus amsr2 regional extent, oct6
Oh, and I would like to make clear I have made many thousands of informative posts on this forum, it's just that my post count has been stuck at 62 since 1975.I wish my age had been stuck since 1975.
;)
Abstract: Arctic amplification (AA) is the phenomenon by which climate change is amplified in the Arctic with respect to global changes. It is partly related to the ice–albedo feedback mechanism. The Arctic region is experiencing a strong surface warming and a decrease in sea ice extent and thickness. This well-documented phenomenon appears to be accelerating in the last decades.
Several feedbacks are involved in the AA , notably those associated with the atmospheric hydrological cycle ....
Upward TCWV trends above the oceanic areas are discussed in lien with sea ice extent and sea surface temperature changes. Increased winter TCWV (up to 40%) south of the Svalbard archipelago are observed; these trends are probably driven by a local warming and sea ice extent decline. Similarly, the Barents/Kara regions underwent wet trends (up to 40%), also associated with winter/fall local sea ice loss. Positive late summer TCWV trends above the western Greenland and Beaufort seas (about 20%) result from enhanced upper ocean warming and thereby a local coastal decline in ice extent. ....Other TCWV anomalies are also presented and discussed in relation to the dramatic decline in sea ice extent and the exceptional rise in sea surface temperature.
Arctic amplification (AA) is the phenomenon by which climate change is amplified in the Arctic with respect to global changes. It is partly related to the ice–albedo feedback mechanism. The Arctic region is experiencing a strong surface warming and a decrease in sea ice extent and thickness. This well-documented phenomenon .. appears to be accelerating in the last decades. Several feedbacks are involved in the AA , notably those associated with the atmospheric hydrological cycle . The warming of the lower part of the Arctic atmosphere is found to be sensitive to the albedo changes due to increasing pollution agents (such as black carbon) on the Arctic sea ice/snow , loss of sea ice coverage, as well as the increase of the atmospheric northward transport of heat and moisture. The spatiotemporal distribution of water vapour and the amplitude of its response to Arctic climate change are major sources of uncertainty in the understanding and prediction of the amplification mechanism ]. Cloud and water vapour-related feedbacks to the AA are of enhanced interest
Temp anomalies still mostly +ve,
SST anomalies still mostly +ve.
Re-freeze still resisted?
October 4-8.Could be that Lorenzo's waves took a toll on the Atlantic Ocean side, especially around Svalbard?
Could be that Lorenzo's waves took a toll on the Atlantic Ocean side, especially around Svalbard?
Strange to see such a drop on October.
Could be that Lorenzo's waves took a toll on the Atlantic Ocean side, especially around Svalbard?I think the continual export into FJL and Svalbard area over the summer was more unusual. Ice along the atlantic edge has been weakened or melted by sitting over a warm current all that time. Now the drift has temporarily? changed direction it offers little resistance. Yes, it's strange that this has come so late.
Strange to see such a drop on October.
The remaining weeks of October are very important. Normally it should be a century uptick each day. 2019 can delay the fast refreeze because the peripheral seas have the extra heat stored. I'm curious to see how it will go. But I'm confident the inner basin must refreeze by early November anywayAttached is a graph showing average, 2019 and 2018 extent change from mid Sept to mid-November (JAXA data).
The remaining weeks of October are very important. Normally it should be a century uptick each day. 2019 can delay the fast refreeze because the peripheral seas have the extra heat stored. I'm curious to see how it will go. But I'm confident the inner basin must refreeze by early November anywayAttached is a graph showing average, 2019 and 2018 extent change from mid Sept to mid-November (JAXA data).
The low 2019 refreeze since minimum is impressive, as was 2018 until now. My guess is that persisting high SST anomalies and +ve Arctic temperature anomalies averaging around +3 for the next week or so will keep refreeze below average for a bit longer - & then zoom up as in 2018 (or maybe not)?
You can see it every day gradually morphing on the Sea Ice Extent & Area Data thread.The remaining weeks of October are very important. Normally it should be a century uptick each day. 2019 can delay the fast refreeze because the peripheral seas have the extra heat stored. I'm curious to see how it will go. But I'm confident the inner basin must refreeze by early November anywayAttached is a graph showing average, 2019 and 2018 extent change from mid Sept to mid-November (JAXA data).
The low 2019 refreeze since minimum is impressive, as was 2018 until now. My guess is that persisting high SST anomalies and +ve Arctic temperature anomalies averaging around +3 for the next week or so will keep refreeze below average for a bit longer - & then zoom up as in 2018 (or maybe not)?
Lovely figure gerontocrat
SIE growth is slowing. Would not surprise me if it stays in 2nd place for a while.
Agree!
My guess is for about 10-14 days max before it becomes lowest again.
<Snipped> currently there is not that much cold enough
water to allow for significant ice-growth, given the right conditions, even a small drop would
be possible even though not that probably at this time of the year.
BTW a 5-10 days long slow increase, given the melt onset in Antarctica, could see a significant
worsening of the global sea-ice situation as well.
Could be that Lorenzo's waves took a toll on the Atlantic Ocean side, especially around Svalbard?I think the continual export into FJL and Svalbard area over the summer was more unusual. Ice along the atlantic edge has been weakened or melted by sitting over a warm current all that time. Now the drift has temporarily? changed direction it offers little resistance. Yes, it's strange that this has come so late.
Strange to see such a drop on October.
unihamburg amsr2-uhh, atlantic side, oct3-9
edit: looking at the forecast, export should resume shortly.
Whether it's [compaction]drift or melt, it does indeed feel a bit late for this & had it happened a month ago the minimum would have been even more interesting.I think the continual export into FJL and Svalbard area over the summer was more unusual. Ice along the atlantic edge has been weakened or melted by sitting over a warm current all that time. Now the drift has temporarily? changed direction it offers little resistance. Yes, it's strange that this has come so late.
That's not just drift. There is extensive melt happening, most noticeably on the tongue of ice that had extended towards the Barents between FJI and Svalbard. Also along the ice extending south along the coast of Greenland.
If we are eyeballing DMIs graph over Arctic temperaturen, we should start to see some decent extent gains soon. As Friv has pointed out earlier in another thread we should be very grateful that the melting in ESS was so resistent. Otherwise, the situation would have been a lot worse.
October 8-12.It appears as if extent growth is back at last (check out especially the Atlantic side).
The IPCC's recently released "Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate":
https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc/home/
Here's a recording of the associated press conference:
https://youtu.be/JYFMCU8L0zU
The first 37 mins are rather boring!
"It is very likely that there will be at least one sea-ice free Arctic summer out of 10 years for warming at 2 degrees C, with the frequency decreasing to one sea-ice-free Arctic summer every 100 years at 1.5 degrees C”
What's the reasoning behind this and how does it stand against the trends on the ice volume chart?
Compaction is extreme, so there is no easy to freeze ice; SSTs are way above anything I have seen before, and there is warmer than average air over the Arctic the next few days. I would say that it is likely that 2019 will get to the first place some time October. Refreeze should be very very slow.
Or the Arctic will trick me again as it usually does :)
Note in particular the dark blue area north of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago.
Ice begets ice. Even above 80N there is no ice creation except relatively close to the ice edge. What happens when there is no ice to begin with?The shore begets ice as well.
In the last week or so....
- The Central Arctic Sea (North of 80) is freezing quickly,
- Most other seas are freezing very slowly,
Perhaps the persistent high +ve SSTs and the Arctic temperature anomalies (-ve near the pole, mostly +ve or very +ve elsewhere) have something to do with it.
Click gif to start - repeats 4 times
Perhaps the persistent high +ve SSTs and the Arctic temperature anomalies (-ve near the pole, mostly +ve or very +ve elsewhere) have something to do with it.
The arctic temperature anomalies are more likely the result of the SSTs, not causing them. water has a vastly larger specific heat capacity than air.
Extent is a LOT lower than the next lowest . I wonder what effect this could have on next September if the slope of the re freeze graph keeps to this rate ?The ice could be more thin than usuall. But the freezing season is long enough to make up to 2m-thickness FYI. Extra snowfalls can protect the ice in May and June like it was in 2017
Extra snowfalls can protect the ice in May and June like it was in 2017...
NSIDC Total Area as at 18 October 2019 (5 day trailing average) 4,313,171 km2 ...In general, as climate change has caused, decade by decade, sea ice loss in the Arctic, I would expect the end of a decade to have less than the decade's average.
Arctic Sea Ice Area is 752 k below the 2010's average.
...
Earlier this year I visited the European Center for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, a European organization that produces global weather forecasts and performs research on how to improve those. The episode has three parts. First, Hilda Carr gives us an overview of the organization, its purpose, and its history. Then I talk with Peter Bauer about weather and climate modeling and about encoding these models efficiently in software programs that run on supercomputers. Part three is a conversation with Tony McNally about where the ECMWF gets its data and how it is continuously fed into the "running" model.
October 12-19.
.... Nevertheless, it would appear that accumulated heat in the Arctic Ocean/system is an important factor.
October 17-21.
2018 (https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2413.msg177930.html#msg177930).
It is also fascinating that so little attention has been paid to this ongoing event on this forum. Nevertheless, it would appear that accumulated heat in the Arctic Ocean/system is an important factor.Many have nothing to add and don't want to get yelled at for cluttering up the thread with their inane chatter.
.... Nevertheless, it would appear that accumulated heat in the Arctic Ocean/system is an important factor.
It seems to be THE most important factor
QuoteIt is also fascinating that so little attention has been paid to this ongoing event on this forum. Nevertheless, it would appear that accumulated heat in the Arctic Ocean/system is an important factor.Many have nothing to add and don't want to get yelled at for cluttering up the thread with their inane chatter.
Albedo, ocean heat content , decline of old ice .
Weather is the other factor.
One would suggest that weather is all that is stopping A BOE in the near term.. less than a decade.
Then it will get truly interesting.
The historically late advancement of the Arctic Sea Ice extent is quite noteworthy, to say the least. It is also fascinating that so little attention has been paid to this ongoing event on this forum. Nevertheless, it would appear that accumulated heat in the Arctic Ocean/system is an important factor.
Good thing that didn't happen in July or August :-\The MYI leaving to the Fram strait and being replaced by FYI (or even open water) is not a good thing. We may start the next melt season with the thin FYI north of 80 latitude and very thin ice on the peripheral seas.
My understanding is this: The heat lost through emission into the atmosphere is what cools the Earth. There isn't enough insolation to balance the heat loss through the year at the poles. The oceans and the Atmosphere transfer heat to the poles from the tropics where insolation is greater than the heat loss from emissions. The Arctic ocean is effectively insulated from oceanic transport by the continually refreshed halocline. The only way to create a BOE is transport of heat and water vapor by the atmosphere to north of 80 degrees, even from the surrounding peripheral seas. I'm not sure if this is what you mean by weather? If it's cold then there wont be a BOE, if it's warm and wet then there will be?Yes but.
... I would suggest that aside from transport from outside the Arctic basin, total solar irradiance on the Arctic Sea itself had a significant impact on adding heat to the Arctic Ocean system in 2019. This was significantly affected by weather, of course, and also by early season reductions in albedo.
Comments?
A Polar Vortex Split is coming in about a week.
A Polar Vortex Split is coming in about a week.
This is again, very bad news, coming earlier Year by Year.
NSIDC Total Area as at 23 October 2019 (5 day trailing average) 4,665,239 km2
2016 is now MORE than 2019 by just 19 k, so on this day 2019 area is lowest in the satellite record. It is still likely that from now on 2016 will be the year to watch - very low area gains for some time to come (see graph).
Forum members will recall that earlier this year the discussion was largely about conditioning the ice. In particular heat transfer from water vapor just above the ice was seen as key to creating melt ponds that would drive melt. Low humidity, clear skies would not do this. Solar energy impacting the system was not seen as a key driver of sea ice melt.
Thus, when significant low humidity clear skies occurred over substantial areas in the arctic basin many predicted a non record breaking melt. Which is exactly what transpired.
But what is the significance of the heat that entered the Arctic Sea system? Is this added energy now affecting the re-freeze?
Full-size version available in the Nullschool Animations thread:The wind bouts are arresting the growth of ice over ESS (temporarily)
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2905.msg234080.html#msg234080
pressure, wind & density over sea ice concentration
Hindcast: 10/19 to 10/24, Forecast: 10/24 to 10/27.
AMSR2 (U. Bremen sea ice concentration) + MSLP (mean sea level pressure) + IWPD@850hPa (instantaneous wind power density: air density ρ, wind velocity v: ½ρv3) [tiny version]
I suggest that no matter how we got here, there is a connection between
- where the ice is and is not,
- SST anomalies,
- Surface temperature anomalies.
I think the corresponding shape of ice-covered areas on the one hand and higher surface temperature anomalies on the other hand can be easily explained. If in the long term (e.g. median 1981-2010) a certain area of the Arctic Ocean has been usually covered with ice at a certain date and this year it is not, the difference in surface temperature (ice-covered = well below - 2°C; ice-free = above -1.8°C, maybe above 0°C) must be clearly visible in the SST anomaly map.
What about that heating 1 m3 of Water requires the same amount of energy as heating 3,000 m3 of air?I think the corresponding shape of ice-covered areas on the one hand and higher surface temperature anomalies on the other hand can be easily explained. If in the long term (e.g. median 1981-2010) a certain area of the Arctic Ocean has been usually covered with ice at a certain date and this year it is not, the difference in surface temperature (ice-covered = well below - 2°C; ice-free = above -1.8°C, maybe above 0°C) must be clearly visible in the SST anomaly map.
Exactly. That's a much better explanation than I gave. The air has a much lower specific heat capacity than water, so water is the temperature 'buffer'. Once ice forms the ocean can no longer transfer heat to the air as effectively, and the temperatures will tend to the long term average.
I think that the anomalous temperatures by the Greenland "crack" offer the most compelling evidence for the connections between the sun, albedo, ice and open ocean.
That "crack' was much more than a crack. It allowed the ocean to absorb vast amounts of solar power that is now being irradiated out. Larger earlier cracks will make this anomaly stronger and last longer. At some point, the ice will thicken enough to reduce the anomaly
Early loss of ice area inside the Arctic Basin as well as outside easily explains the accumulated heat. Check out the series of attached charts (big thanks to Tealight / Nico Sun for providing these in real time). Note the AWP calculation does not take clouds/weather into account, just solar angles and ice/water albedo.
Not surprisingly, the same areas with the highest anomalies are the same ones with relatively delayed refreeze. I expect this pattern to continue in November and December.
To see if Nares has closed, you'll need to look at least the DMI Satellite images (http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/kennedy.uk.php).
It looks like Nares Strait has closed up.
Or does it take longer than a few days to make that call?
If Nares freezes up this week for the winter, I think it would be unprecedentedly early in the last couple of decades
I should have looked closer myself.... Aluminium's GIF looked like it was frozen over but it was just a lack of detail.
Thank you for GIFs
A Polar Vortex Split is coming in about a week.
This is again, very bad news, coming earlier Year by Year.
The Oceans are just spewing out Heat, relentlessly.
A Polar Vortex Split is coming in about a week.
This is again, very bad news, coming earlier Year by Year.
The Oceans are just spewing out Heat, relentlessly.
Why is the release of heat a bad thing since it can now radiate back into outer space? I am confused when the complaint is that heat is being trapped in the ocean and also when heat is not being trapped. I just want consistency.
A Polar Vortex Split is coming in about a week.
This is again, very bad news, coming earlier Year by Year.
The Oceans are just spewing out Heat, relentlessly.
Why is the release of heat a bad thing since it can now radiate back into outer space? I am confused when the complaint is that heat is being trapped in the ocean and also when heat is not being trapped. I just want consistency.
A Polar Vortex Split is coming in about a week.
This is again, very bad news, coming earlier Year by Year.
The Oceans are just spewing out Heat, relentlessly.
Sea Ice North of Canada appears to be receeding or do my eyes fail me?
Russian side is like someone squirting whipped cream.
If it kept at that pace the whole NH would freeze.
[/quote
You'll have to explain that technical term, please...."squirting whipped cream"
:o :o :o :o :o]
You'll have to explain that technical term, please...."squirting whipped cream"
:o :o :o :o :o
October 27-31.
2018 (https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2413.msg179072.html#msg179072).
The Chukchi Sea still does not want to freeze.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EIJ6cPNWoAI33YP.jpg)
Has anyone figured out where we are now walking on the average annual area in the Arctic?
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EIQNERiWsAEOqGt.jpg)
look at how warm the pacific side is even relative to 2016. it will take weeks to freeze!
look at how warm the pacific side is even relative to 2016. it will take weeks to freeze!
Has anyone figured out where we are now walking on the average annual area in the Arctic?
Updated record low #Arctic sea ice extent months - @NSIDC data (satellite-era from 1978/1979)
--------------
2018 : January
2018 : February
2017 : March
2019 : April
2016 : May
2016 : June
2019 : July
2012 : August
2012 : September
2019 : October
2016 : November
2016 : December
I’m wondering if the very quick refreeze is actually a bad thing? I remember several people here stating there was a lot of snow on the ice pack in May. Which delayed melting (melt ponds didn’t form). I know the snow can come from other areas but the quicker the refreeze of the Arctic Ocean the less moisture would be available for snow to fall in the arctic.
Does this make sense?
But that venting into space may be reduced to some extent in an open water sea - warmer air, increased low cloud and fog.I’m wondering if the very quick refreeze is actually a bad thing? I remember several people here stating there was a lot of snow on the ice pack in May. Which delayed melting (melt ponds didn’t form). I know the snow can come from other areas but the quicker the refreeze of the Arctic Ocean the less moisture would be available for snow to fall in the arctic.
Does this make sense?
It makes sense, a few points though;
The argument is normally that a delayed refreeze allows more heat to vent into space, not that it creates more snow. Snow protects sea ice during spring/summer but is bad for sea ice in the autumn as it insulates against the polar night.
I’m wondering if the very quick refreeze is actually a bad thing? I remember several people here stating there was a lot of snow on the ice pack in May. Which delayed melting (melt ponds didn’t form). I know the snow can come from other areas but the quicker the refreeze of the Arctic Ocean the less moisture would be available for snow to fall in the arctic.
Does this make sense?
How much Bering ice will form?
How weak and thin will the Chukchi ice be?
How much will this lack of buffer effect early melt?
I think this next year may see severe anomalies and its effects may penetrate into the central arctic.
I’m wondering if the very quick refreeze is actually a bad thing? I remember several people here stating there was a lot of snow on the ice pack in May. Which delayed melting (melt ponds didn’t form). I know the snow can come from other areas but the quicker the refreeze of the Arctic Ocean the less moisture would be available for snow to fall in the arctic.
Does this make sense?
While there are arguments pro and con - "sealing in heat", less venting to space, less snow vs more humidity and warmth in the lower atmosphere, more insulating snow, etc. etc. I have to defer to Occam's Razor: more and earlier freezing is good for the ice; less and later freezing is bad. This is probably overly simplistic and there are likely countervailing samples here and there across the arctic, but overall, that's my guess.
Fram export via Sentinel SAR
Click to play
Thanks for this. Some of those big floes could be very thick MYI according to Cryosat-2 data
I kbow DMI has pole "bias" but I wouldn't disagree a lot with them this time. As we know the pole is centered more towards Atlantic side, so 80N seems to be average. The rest of the Arcric is also fairly average (or even colder where there is ice, hot zones in Chuckchi and Baffin are there because there is no ice yet. We can clearly "see" that ice border on this photo (Nares and eastern CAA in blue Baffin Bay in red).
I kbow DMI has pole "bias" but I wouldn't disagree a lot with them this time. As we know the pole is centered more towards Atlantic side, so 80N seems to be average. The rest of the Arcric is also fairly average (or even colder where there is ice, hot zones in Chuckchi and Baffin are there because there is no ice yet. We can clearly "see" that ice border on this photo (Nares and eastern CAA in blue Baffin Bay in red).
This does not quite match what the image shows. The entirety of ESS is covered in ice, and is still deeply red on the 2m Temporature Anomaly. Laptev and Beaufort ice is only covered in red. In fact, most of the sea ice at the moment has positive temp anomalies.
That's not what my eyes see. Certainly on the forward side there is much red, but on the other...and still in the Arctic, vast areas of blue. Like most up here, you seem to be red biased....as I am blue...lol
And the anomalies over Greenland are also significant.
I've drawn a very rough estimate of 80N and the ice edge (green line) on the image below, as you can see the area north of 80 is indeed very cold, all the rest of the Arctic is unusally warm, and this include most of the ice covered part of the Arctic.
[quote]this is a quote[/quote]Think the end of the century rises is close. Maybe 50k climbs now. The whipped cream has all been stirred up now and will just slowly spread out in the coffee cupThat's awfully cold coffee!
They charge more for iced coffee. It takes a lot of energy to make the cold to freeze the hot stuff. Homo Sapiens rules, OK?Think the end of the century rises is close. Maybe 50k climbs now. The whipped cream has all been stirred up now and will just slowly spread out in the coffee cupThat's awfully cold coffee!
Could holes (polinios sp?) in the ice over winter cause extra circulation to draw up warmer water... <snippage>With air temperatures of -25C the leads (fractures) won't be open water for very long, though the thinner ice does show up warmer using worldview brightness temperature.
Last buoy status on 2019/11/9 120101 UTC : temperature = -2.3125 °C, battery = 10.028 Van example of trapped heat?
Last position on 2019/11/9 120101 UTC : 71.5516° N, 126.79° W
Rapid refreeze now underway in Hudson Bay, should sustain for the next several days at least.
Am I wrong in speculating that the faster the ice freezes this winter the faster it's likely to melt out next spring? I think so, as such 'predicticating' is utterly without any science to back it up. :)
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/plots/meanTarchive/meanT_2019.png
it looks like we shall see the first autumnal fall below mean on the dmi80 chart since 2015 . b.c.
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/plots/meanTarchive/meanT_2019.pnghttp://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/plots/meanTarchive/meanT_2019.png
it looks like we shall see the first autumnal fall below mean on the dmi80 chart since 2015 . b.c.
And then DMI80 is like "nah never mind":
(https://i.imgur.com/wscL02Z.png)
24 hours later ...
Windy weather is expected in the Chukchi Sea.
This is a catastrophe. :(No it isn't. It is impressive but it is a very early melt causing very high SST +ve anomalies followed by a very late freeze. There are those who say late freeze causes a colder sea (rapid venting of heat) and when freeze occurs thickening can be rapid. There are those who say that late freeze means less time for ice to thicken.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EJL9QW6U4AAqLQX.jpg)
No it isn't. It is impressive but it is a very early melt causing very high SST +ve anomalies followed by a very late freeze. There are those who say late freeze causes a colder sea (rapid venting of heat) and when freeze occurs thickening can be rapid. There are those who say that late freeze means less time for ice to thicken.
'Ticking Time Bomb' of Heated Ocean Discovered Hidden Under The Arctic
PETER DOCKRILL30 AUG 2018
(https://www.sciencealert.com/images/2018-08/296-arctic-heat-archive-ocean-melt-ice-1.jpg)
The Arctic is not in a good way. Its oldest, thickest sea ice is breaking. Strange lakes punctuate its landscape. The very chemistry of its water is changing.
Things could be about to get worse. New research has uncovered evidence of a vast reservoir of heated water building up underneath the Arctic Ocean and penetrating deep into the heart of the polar region, where it threatens to melt the ice frozen on top. And maybe a lot of it.
"We document a striking ocean warming in one of the main basins of the interior Arctic Ocean, the Canadian Basin," explains oceanographer Mary-Louise Timmermans from Yale University.
Timmermans and her team analysed temperature data on the Canada Basin taken over the last 30 years, and found that the amount of heat in the warmest part of the water had effectively doubled in the period 1987 to 2017.
The basin, which sits to the north of Alaska, is made up of mixed layers of ocean water, with cold, fresh water flowing at the surface, sitting on top of a body of warmer, saltier ocean trapped beneath it.
That dynamic has long been the case, but it's the rapidly heating conditions of the warmer reservoir below that has scientists concerned.
"Presently this heat is trapped below the surface layer," Timmermans says.
"Should it be mixed up to the surface, there is enough heat to entirely melt the sea-ice pack that covers this region for most of the year."
According to the researchers, the warmer submerged waters have been 'archiving' heat due to "anomalous solar heating" of surface waters in the northern Chukchi Sea, which feeds the Canada Basin.
Basically, as sea ice seasonally and increasingly melts in the Chukchi Sea, open water gets exposed to the heat of sunlight, warms up, and is then driven northwards by Arctic winds – a current phenomenon called the Beaufort Gyre.
As this heated water travels to the Arctic, the warmer waters then descend below the colder layer of the Canadian Basin – but the amount they've heated up in the past three decades could represent "a ticking time bomb", the researchers warn.
"That heat isn't going to go away," one of the team, oceanographer John Toole from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, told CBC.
"Eventually … it's going have to come up to the surface and it's going to impact the ice."
While the researchers don't think there's any immediate threat, strong winds mixing the colder and warmer water layers – or an increase in salinity, driving the warmer water upwards – could severely impact Arctic ice.
And even if those outcomes don't result, the temperature trajectory already seen could be affecting ice coverage more subtly, although nobody knows the exact ramifications yet.
"It remains to be seen how continued sea ice losses will fundamentally change the water column structure and dynamics," the authors explain in their paper, although they note in the coming years the excess heat "will give rise to enhanced upward heat fluxes year-round, creating compound effects on the system by slowing winter sea ice growth."
More research is needed to calculate just how serious this situation is, but there's no denying these mechanisms are all part of a much bigger problem – and one that isn't going away.
"We're seeing more and more open water as the sea ice retreats in the summertime," Timmermans told the Canadian Press.
"The Sun is warming up the ocean directly, because it's no longer covered by sea ice."
The Chuckchi sea (and the Bering) can really start the next melt season with the record low volume (again). But it won't be a catastrophe because the CAB still have the pretty thick ice that will mostly survive the melt season.This is wrong. The Chukchi and Bering are, IMO, directly tied to the freezing season in North America and its duration. If the Chukchi and Bering's volume remains at record lows through the freezing season and into the spring, there is a very good chance winter will not abate until May, or even June, across the most productive food-growing regions on the planet.
The Chuckchi sea (and the Bering) can really start the next melt season with the record low volume (again). But it won't be a catastrophe because the CAB still have the pretty thick ice that will mostly survive the melt season.This is wrong. The Chukchi and Bering are, IMO, directly tied to the freezing season in North America and its duration. If the Chukchi and Bering's volume remains at record lows through the freezing season and into the spring, there is a very good chance winter will not abate until May, or even June, across the most productive food-growing regions on the planet.
We already have a catastrophe unfolding after this year's late start and early finish. If 2020 repeats the same pattern (or worse) there will be major shocks to food prices beyond what is already likely in the pipeline due to this year's harvest.
If the CAB has ice when people start to starve, BOE will be trivial at that point. The impacts are already well underway due to certain regions becoming increasingly ice-free, and we may not even need an ice-free CAB to see catastrophe unfold in the form of spiraling food prices.
It was a catastrophe, the data is still processing. There are more crops than corn. We obviously have redundancies but if the weather next year is worse than this one, the impacts will IMO be severe.The Chuckchi sea (and the Bering) can really start the next melt season with the record low volume (again). But it won't be a catastrophe because the CAB still have the pretty thick ice that will mostly survive the melt season.This is wrong. The Chukchi and Bering are, IMO, directly tied to the freezing season in North America and its duration. If the Chukchi and Bering's volume remains at record lows through the freezing season and into the spring, there is a very good chance winter will not abate until May, or even June, across the most productive food-growing regions on the planet.
We already have a catastrophe unfolding after this year's late start and early finish. If 2020 repeats the same pattern (or worse) there will be major shocks to food prices beyond what is already likely in the pipeline due to this year's harvest.
If the CAB has ice when people start to starve, BOE will be trivial at that point. The impacts are already well underway due to certain regions becoming increasingly ice-free, and we may not even need an ice-free CAB to see catastrophe unfold in the form of spiraling food prices.
Thus years harvest was not a catastrophe. Corn production is only down about 9% from last year, and still above 2015 levels. Wheat production was up 4% over 2018. Food prices are down significantly from the spring scare, which caused more hype than harm.
The Chuckchi sea (and the Bering) can really start the next melt season with the record low volume (again). But it won't be a catastrophe because the CAB still have the pretty thick ice that will mostly survive the melt season.This is wrong. The Chukchi and Bering are, IMO, directly tied to the freezing season in North America and its duration. If the Chukchi and Bering's volume remains at record lows through the freezing season and into the spring, there is a very good chance winter will not abate until May, or even June, across the most productive food-growing regions on the planet.
November 8-12.
2018 (https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2413.msg180773.html#msg180773).
November 8-12.
2018 (https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2413.msg180773.html#msg180773).
Is it possible to change the crop of the animation? I'd be interested in seeing Hudson and Baffin bay etc in the coming weeks
It is, but Aluminium prefers not to, I think it might be a filesize issue.I think it's mostly a usability trade-off issue between too much cropping and too much zooming out, where I think Aluminium hit the sweet spot. And it's also a backward compatibility issue with his previous animations as he's been making these for over a year now using the same cropping template.
It is, but Aluminium prefers not to, I think it might be a filesize issue.I think it's mostly a usability trade-off issue between too much cropping and too much zooming out, where I think Aluminium hit the sweet spot. And it's also a backward compatibility issue with his previous animations as he's been making these for over a year now using the same cropping template.
The downside is that at the end of the freezing season (Jan, Feb) all the action is in the far peripheral seas and the animation becomes less useful. That is the time of year when Aluminium decreases the publishing rate to once a week, IIRC.
I will take the opportunity to again thank Aluminium for this important service to the community.
Am I wrong in speculating that the faster the ice freezes this winter the faster it's likely to melt out next spring? I think so, as such 'predicticating' is utterly without any science to back it up. :)
But the lack of ice in the Chukchi and Bering speak very strongly to what will happen next spring on the Pacific side.
November 10-14.
November 10-14.
Is the ESS ice near the shore being melted, or just pushed away by wind?
SimonF92, I think your money is safe.November 10-14.
Is the ESS ice near the shore being melted, or just pushed away by wind?
It looks like the ice follows the predominant wind pattern over the same period, my money would be on wind
Looks like Fram export could stall...increasing the chances of itp116 (https://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=164836) making it to the Nares ;)
..increasing the chances of itp116 making it to the Nares ;)
Looks like Fram export could stall.
Big spike up on the dmi north of 80 graph!
The northern Chukchi Sea is finally starting to freeze, but #seaice extent from @NSIDC remains by far the lowest of record this late in the season. Ice also forming near land on the Alaska side of Bering Sea but extent is half of average.
I've got a feeling that over the next few days it is goodbye to the Chukchi Big Bite.
Recent tweet from Rick Thoman has pointed out that Bering sea ice extent has kicked off and reached the 50,000km2 mark. (NSIDC data)
Earliest date it has reached this level since 2012.
It's only though in the shallow sounds and bays and will still be vulnerable to destructive swells and wind.
Although if you look at the higher resolution Uni-Bremen there is not as much ice in those bays.
Recent tweet from Rick Thoman has pointed out that Bering sea ice extent has kicked off and reached the 50,000km2 mark. (NSIDC data)
Earliest date it has reached this level since 2012.
It's only though in the shallow sounds and bays and will still be vulnerable to destructive swells and wind.
Although if you look at the higher resolution Uni-Bremen there is not as much ice in those bays.
Response to a discussion in the data thread. UH animation, 2016 to 2019. Click to start.
2019 initial Bering refreeze is indeed earlier.
You beat me to it. But my image is just a png for all the Arctic as at 24 Nov. . As you say, and nullschool says, the switch to winds from the SW seems due on about the 25th. But 3-4 days of those winds and the Chukchi big bite will be a teensy-weensy bite ?Recent tweet from Rick Thoman has pointed out that Bering sea ice extent has kicked off and reached the 50,000km2 mark. (NSIDC data)
Earliest date it has reached this level since 2012.
It's only though in the shallow sounds and bays and will still be vulnerable to destructive swells and wind.
Although if you look at the higher resolution Uni-Bremen there is not as much ice in those bays.
Response to a discussion in the data thread. UH animation, 2016 to 2019. Click to start.
2019 initial Bering refreeze is indeed earlier.
There has been a pretty constant northerly wind on that area for about a week now.
That looks set to change within a few days to south-westerlies. I'm guessing the change in winds will be pretty negatively impactful for the ice thats forming there.
I tried to make a nullschool gif but it was simply horrible, you can see for yourself here;
https://earth.nullschool.net/#2019/11/25/1800Z/wind/surface/level/orthographic=-198.75,68.91,1093
There has been a pretty constant northerly wind on that area for about a week now.
That looks set to change within a few days to south-westerlies. I'm guessing the change in winds will be pretty negatively impactful for the ice thats forming there.
NullSchool has changed its mind?
Major stratospheric warming under way(starting today-tomorrow and getting stronger every day)! This will probably have all kinds of consequences for NH midlatitude weather and Arctic weather as well. Pic of T+10 days as an example. (no polar vortex split seen in the forecasts yet)
The rapid Chukchi Sea ice extent increase has abruptly stopped due to change in winds; November ends with lowest #seaice extent of record in @NSIDC data. Bering Sea extent better but is still less than half of average for Nov 30. #akwx #Arctic @Climatologist49 @ZLabe @seaice_de
Autumn 2019 at Utqiaġvik easily the warmest of the past 99 years due to no sea ice & record high nearshore #ssts. Avg temp 28.8F (-1.8C), previous warmest 2016. Trend of 10F (5.6C) since early '90s is stunning. #akwx #Arctic
QuoteThe rapid Chukchi Sea ice extent increase has abruptly stopped due to change in winds; November ends with lowest #seaice extent of record in @NSIDC data. Bering Sea extent better but is still less than half of average for Nov 30. #akwx #Arctic @Climatologist49 @ZLabe @seaice_de
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EKtzJE2UYAAEBIU.jpg)QuoteAutumn 2019 at Utqiaġvik easily the warmest of the past 99 years due to no sea ice & record high nearshore #ssts. Avg temp 28.8F (-1.8C), previous warmest 2016. Trend of 10F (5.6C) since early '90s is stunning. #akwx #Arctic
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EKt5yGKUcAAe3K2.jpg)
https://twitter.com/AlaskaWx
The guy obviously likes to contribute to AGW, just wondering how much heat escapes through that door as compared to if it were closed.
The guy obviously likes to contribute to AGW, just wondering how much heat escapes through that door as compared to if it were closed.
I am going to go there one day and talk to the owner and inform them they are world famous on this forum.
The guy obviously likes to contribute to AGW, just wondering how much heat escapes through that door as compared to if it were closed.
I am going to go there one day and talk to the owner and inform them they are world famous on this forum.
Somebody here explained why the door is left open in the winter. I think it had to do with snow covered, icy outerwear which they peel off on the porch and leave hanging in the cold. If the porch were heated, the snow and ice would melt, soaking the outerwear and making it unusable the next time out.
The guy obviously likes to contribute to AGW, just wondering how much heat escapes through that door as compared to if it were closed.
I am going to go there one day and talk to the owner and inform them they are world famous on this forum.
Chukchi Sea #seaice extent in @NSIDC data is 2nd lowest of record for Dec 14, behind only 2007. Bering Sea ice extent is 3rd lowest in 42 year satellite era. Cold weather later this week will help thicken existing ice & promote new ice development. #akwx #Arctic @Climatologist49
Recent weather conditions have pushed the extent of #Arctic sea ice in the Bering-Chukchi Seas back to the 2nd lowest on record. Data from @NSIDC.
The record low sea ice cover this year has directly impacted many Alaskan coastal communities.
Watching that animation all I can think of is that the solstice is the 21st of December.Nope...
Is that the true reason behind Brexit?Yep. Little Xenophobic Englanders rule, OK?
Is that the true reason behind Brexit?Yep. Little Xenophobic Englanders rule, OK?
Watching that animation all I can think of is that the solstice is the 21st of December.Nope...
Solstice 2019 will be at 04:19 on
Sunday, 22 December
All times are in United Kingdom Time. (UTC)
Late at night on the 21st in the USA, but that don't matter.
Universal Coordinated Time is a johnny-come-lately invention that simply renames GMT - Greenwich Mean Time, which reflects that - 00 degrees longitude runs through Greenwich, London, the original home of the Royal Astronomical Observatory & the Greenwich Naval College.Watching that animation all I can think of is that the solstice is the 21st of December.Nope...
Solstice 2019 will be at 04:19 on
Sunday, 22 December
All times are in United Kingdom Time. (UTC)
Late at night on the 21st in the USA, but that don't matter.
Universal Coordinated Time not UK time, often referred to by pilots as Zulu Time.
The M stands for Meridian, not Mean.Nope...
The name of the clock that shows Greenwich Mean Time at the Royal Observatory in Greenwich, London, UK, is Shepherd Gate Clock
GMT is used as Standard Time in the UK and several other countries and is also a time zone
Offsets or time differences are generally written as UTC/GMT plus or minus a number of hours.
https://greenwichmeantime.com/what-is-gmt/
It doesn't really look like the situation in Europe will be changing any time soon either.
Personally im not convinced that there are enough residuals to draw a correlation between European snow cover and Arctic ice. You may be onto something though- so why not try?
Last year I plotted UK June rainfall against September minimum and nearly got a significant correlation.
More importantly however it DOES look like the Chukchi is finally going to get cold.
Bering Sea #seaice extent is 2nd lowest for this point in the season in @NSIDC daily data, even less than the past two years (only 2007 lower). Weather the next week looks to be conducive to some but not dramatic ice growth. #akwx #Arctic @Climatologist49 @arctic_today @YJRosen
Watching that animation all I can think of is that the solstice is the 21st of December.Nope...
Solstice 2019 will be at 04:19 on
Sunday, 22 December
All times are in United Kingdom Time. (UTC)
Late at night on the 21st in the USA, but that don't matter.
The M stands for Meridian, not Mean.
And UTC is a reference of time intended to be used globally while GMT is no more than a time zone.
TAI is not UTC, TAI is very accurate time in seconds. UTC now uses TAI as a reference, plus leap seconds adjusted by astronomers from time to time, so that UTC midday is in sync with solar midday along Greenwich meridian, since Earth motion is not completely regular.
The M stands for Meridian, not Mean.
And UTC is a reference of time intended to be used globally while GMT is no more than a time zone.
TAI is not UTC, TAI is very accurate time in seconds. UTC now uses TAI as a reference, plus leap seconds adjusted by astronomers from time to time, so that UTC midday is in sync with solar midday along Greenwich meridian, since Earth motion is not completely regular.
ArcticMelt2 this is a great resource for looking at relationships
https://ecm.um.maine.edu/reanalysis/monthly_correl/index.php
If we take the average temperatures in Europe in December, then they really coincide with the minimums of ice in the Arctic in September.The statistical fit is quite poor IMHO, and the physical basis is even poorer
If we take the average temperatures in Europe in December, then they really coincide with the minimums of ice in the Arctic in September.The statistical fit is quite poor IMHO, and the physical basis is even poorer
A general fit of the trends is not enough, ass both are caused by AGW, and the peaks an valleys don't seem to be very much correlated. Chart them together and it will be apparent.
I for one, like your finding correlations all over the place, ArcticMelt. Very impressive even if they turn out not being causation. How do you find them?
The result has been ever increasing tidal flows into the Arctic, leading to greater outflows of other water.Sea ice doesn't change tidal movements in any significant way. And generally speaking, the tides do not move water laterally, it's an up and down movement. So there is no tidal inflow, and hence no tidal outflow.
The result has been ever increasing tidal flows into the Arctic, leading to greater outflows of other water.Sea ice doesn't change tidal movements in any significant way. And generally speaking, the tides do not move water laterally, it's an up and down movement. So there is no tidal inflow, and hence no tidal outflow.
Tides move water back and forth over long distances, and effects of friction/bathymetry and coriolis/vorticity can generate net tidal residual flows and gyres. This could very well be the case for the North Atlantic/Barents/Arctic Ocean system, though I couldn't find anything very specific with a cursory search. Here's one related link:The result has been ever increasing tidal flows into the Arctic, leading to greater outflows of other water.Sea ice doesn't change tidal movements in any significant way. And generally speaking, the tides do not move water laterally, it's an up and down movement. So there is no tidal inflow, and hence no tidal outflow.
I for one, like your finding correlations all over the place, ArcticMelt. Very impressive even if they turn out not being causation. How do you find them?
Just now there is a lot of news on the Internet about a very warm winter in Europe. Everywhere they write that last similar winter was in 2006-2007. Therefore, the correlation with the minima of the Arctic ice suggests itself.
I also came across studies about the possible connection of strong Arctic minima with El Nino and minima of solar activity (in 2007 there was a minimum of solar activity, in 2012, the maximum was the opposite).
I for one, like your finding correlations all over the place, ArcticMelt. Very impressive even if they turn out not being causation. How do you find them?
Just now there is a lot of news on the Internet about a very warm winter in Europe. Everywhere they write that last similar winter was in 2006-2007. Therefore, the correlation with the minima of the Arctic ice suggests itself.
I also came across studies about the possible connection of strong Arctic minima with El Nino and minima of solar activity (in 2007 there was a minimum of solar activity, in 2012, the maximum was the opposite).
I plotted it and you may well be onto something :)
The result has been ever increasing tidal flows into the Arctic, leading to greater outflows of other water.Sea ice doesn't change tidal movements in any significant way. And generally speaking, the tides do not move water laterally, it's an up and down movement. So there is no tidal inflow, and hence no tidal outflow.
Sea ice doesn't change tidal movements in any significant way. And generally speaking, the tides do not move water laterally, it's an up and down movement. So there is no tidal inflow, and hence no tidal outflow.
Ah sorry about the mistake, I am pretty hungover today and did that earlier to avoid doing the work I should actually be doing.
You can see the code (sorry if you dont think R is code) on the left, so replicating the analysis and plots should be pretty straightforward with other data-sets- if you do like the way it was done.
33 YO John Miller
Bering Sea #seaice extent is the lowest of record for Dec 18th in the 42-year @NSIDC data, less than a third of the 1981-2010 average though not too different from three of the past four years. #akwx #Arctic @Climatologist49 @amy_holman @ZLabe @ArcticResearch @KNOMnews @KYUKNews
33 YO John Miller
Can you say anything without making shit personal? What is wrong with you?
33 YO John Miller
Can you say anything without making shit personal? What is wrong with you?
I dread to think how lowly the 92 in my name must be interpreted. But then again Einstein published four 1st author papers at 26- technically his best year.
Animation (https://www.esr.org/research/polar-tide-models/movies/) with the full moon around the 9th
So what I'm suggesting is that without ice there's nothing to inhibit the lateral flow of tidal surges
Sea ice doesn't change tidal movements in any significant way. And generally speaking, the tides do not move water laterally, it's an up and down movement. So there is no tidal inflow, and hence no tidal outflow.
The largest component of the tide in the Arctic Ocean is the semidiurnal M2 (period 12.42h). Since the tide producing force for this constituent in the Arctic Ocean is very small, the origin of this wave is an incoming tide from the Atlantic Ocean. The M2 tide entering the Arctic Ocean between Greenland and Scandinavia is divided by Spitsbergen into two branches. The main wave enters through the Greenland Sea and the secondary wave propagates around Scandinavia towards the White Sea. The latter has amplitude at Northern Norway of about 1m. In the White Sea at the entrance it grows to about 2-3m and in the shallow Mezen Bay the amplitude is greater than 4m. The M2 wave in the main basin of the Arctic Ocean propagates during one period, counterclockwise around an amphidromic point located off the Canadian Archipelago. The tidal amplitude is zero at an amphidromic point, and it increases towards the shoreline. While traveling in the Arctic Ocean the M2 wave undergoes transformation. When it impinges on the North Siberian Shelf its amplitude diminishes through the bottom friction. Along the North Siberian Shelf the amplitude is about 20-30cm and further the amplitude decreases to 5-10cm at the Alaskan shore. The M2 tidal currents in the deep basin are quite small of the order of 2cm/s. The strong currents were observed along the coasts in the shallow water of the Barents Sea, especially over Spitsbergenbanken and close to the Bear Island. The strongest currents often up to 2m/s occur at the entrance to the White Sea. Along the North Siberian Shelf,https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-schematic-pattern-of-the-model-M-2-energy-flux-in-the-Arctic-Ocean-and-adjacent_fig5_44021887
especially in the region of the New Siberian Islands, the M2 tide currents are often of the order of 50 cm/s. The variability of the tidal currents is much stronger compared to the tidal levels, because currents depend on the local conditions, e.g., the currents along Alaska Beaufort coast are of the order of 5-10cm/s, but in the narrow entrances to the coastal lagoons they can be enhanced several times. Amplitudes of the second semidiurnal constituent S2 (period 12h) are much smaller but the general picture of the wave propagating counterclockwise in the main basin is very similar to the M2 wave.
when the wave meets land
With all the cold air headed toward Chukchi now it looks like final ice-over this weekend is almost certain. Might get some nice gains in Bering too. Isn't this almost the same timing as last year?
Utqiaġvik (Barrow), Alaska, had a daily temperature below normal today for the first time since June 24th! #akwx @AlaskaWx
when the wave meets land
Tidal forces occur all over the planet all the time! And they cause currents, sheers, waves, upwellings, gyres - not only where they meet land! How is that not obvious to you, Binntho? I'm honestly baffled. ???
HmmmHas nobody ever tried moving a floating object by sending waves towards it? Try it in the bath! It can't be done, because waves are up and down movements of liquids.
Do you perhaps have links to any literature that details how the tidal forces cause "currents, sheers, waves, upwelling, gyres", nota bene "all over the planet all the time" ...
How many currents, sheers, waves, upwellings and gyres does the tidal force cause in the Pacific? How many in the Atlantic? Details, locations and documentation thereof would be well received, since any and all would be a true revelation.
Do you perhaps have links to any literature that details how the tidal forces cause "currents, sheers, waves, upwelling, gyres", nota bene "all over the planet all the time" ...
Chukchi Sea #seaice continues to increase, though open water/low concentrations persist north of Bering Strait & east of Wrangel Island. Bering Sea ice extent only 34% of 1981-2010 average in @NSIDC data. Significant ice growth likely upcoming week. #akwx #Arctic @Climatologist49
Chukchi Sea #seaice extent up to ~96% of the basin in @NSIDC data. This makes Dec 22 the third latest for first date in the autumn for extent to reach ≥95%. The trend is extreme: ice-over is now typically four weeks later than ~1990. #akwx #Arctic @Climatologist49 @YJRosen
Although sea-ice extent is not the lowest right now, volume appears to be low, and might influence extent to become a low maximum this winter.
2012, 2016, 2019 compared.
http://polarportal.dk/en/sea-ice-and-icebergs/sea-ice-thickness-and-volume/#c23629
Although sea-ice extent is not the lowest right now, volume appears to be low, and might influence extent to become a low maximum this winter.
2012, 2016, 2019 compared.
http://polarportal.dk/en/sea-ice-and-icebergs/sea-ice-thickness-and-volume/#c23629
If I remember correctly, DMI modified their volume model in a recent year, so that it is not possible to directly compare 2012 with now, maybe 2016 too.
To the "old hands" out there ... wondering if this is what the "old normal" used to look like...?
A glimpse of the past, for a week at least...?
To the "old hands" out there ... wondering if this is what the "old normal" used to look like...?
A glimpse of the past, for a week at least...?
This present NH mean sea level set-up reminds me very much of December 1988. That was the month that began a very mild winter in western Europe and the time when I first started to take notice of "global warming" or whatever it was called back then.
Here is the Dec 1988 pattern and the current GFS 10 mean forecast.
Hey, Thank You for the info, Niall. I'm "new ice" and very interested in the knowledge on this board. The low pressure on the - what do you call it - Russia/Norway side of the Arctic ... how does that impact radiation outbound (cooling)...?
To the "old hands" out there ... wondering if this is what the "old normal" used to look like...?
A glimpse of the past, for a week at least...?
This present NH mean sea level set-up reminds me very much of December 1988. That was the month that began a very mild winter in western Europe and the time when I first started to take notice of "global warming" or whatever it was called back then.
Here is the Dec 1988 pattern and the current GFS 10 mean forecast.
Hey, Thank You for the info, I'm "new ice" and very interested in the knowledge on this board. The low pressure on the - what do you call it - Russia/Norway side of the Arctic ... how does that impact radiation outbound (cooling)...?
I've been trying to get the relationships down - low pressure = rising air, etc ... but why the low? With little or no cloud cover. It's a mystery to me ....
Bering sea ice extent (near Alaska) remains well below average. However, it is beginning to quickly expand in response to favorable weather conditions (cold, northerly flow). Data from @NSIDC.
Hey, Thank You for the info, I'm "new ice" and very interested in the knowledge on this board. The low pressure on the - what do you call it - Russia/Norway side of the Arctic ... how does that impact radiation outbound (cooling)...?
I've been trying to get the relationships down - low pressure = rising air, etc ... but why the low? With little or no cloud cover. It's a mystery to me ....
In the present set-up we have the polar vortex in the upper atmosphere near the pole and it's keeping the cold air locked up in the Arctic.
Good for ice in the Arctic now but low snow cover extent would be concern come Spring time.
Thanks again ... I think I need to read more history ... it's fascinating!
Edit : And hurrah - I see that has tipped me over the 500 posts and into the Grease Ice ! ;D
Colder weather has allowed for significant #seaice growth in the Bering Sea. But…ice extent far below long-term average in @NSIDC data, at 3rd lowest of record for the date. Weather pattern looks good for continued ice growth at least another week. #akwx #Arctic @Climatologist49
Alaska 2019 climate review starts at the top: Utqiaġvik had by far the warmest year in the past 99 years, more the 11F (6C) above the pre-1980 average. Think about that. Eight of the 10 warmest years in #2010s. Why? Collapse of #seaice. #akwx #Arctic @Climatologist49 @ajatnuvuk
Standardized anomalies of annual regional #Arctic sea ice extent - now updated through 2019. New record low this year for the Chukchi Sea.
[Data from @NSIDC; Bright blue = maximum year, bright red = minimum year, vertical lines = 2007/2012/2016/2019]
The Bering Sea average ice extent for December was second lowest in the 42-year from @NSIDC passive microwave data, only 41% of 1981-2010 average. Good weather now for ice growth but late start sure to reduce thickness. #akwx #Arctic #seaice @Climatologist49 @KNOMnews @KYUKNews
https://twitter.com/zlabe(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ENOnI6HXUAAiBU_.png)
That all fits with the idea that CAA will be the last refuge for declining Sept (then Aug/Oct/July) ice persistence. Does this make sense, or am I just making this up?
Did Nullschool change it's data set for ocean temperature? That Svalbard hotspot is gone, and the overall look is different.
https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/ocean/surface/currents/overlay=sea_surface_temp_anomaly/orthographic=-43.52,59.73,873
December 31 2019, with Polar Vortex off center weighted temperature measuring -48 C CTNP over Ellesmere Island, the coldest such air ever measured for this date, surpassing all others by 4 degrees C (1948-2018).
Yes Nullschool have changed their data source see these two images. New source (which is more correct for SST in my opinion is OSTIA/UK Met +GHRSST + CMEMSThanks Niall! (Is your name pronounced as Neal, or Nile?)
Old source I gleaned from the old nullchool thread was RTG SST/NCEP
Coldest New Years Eve Cold Temperature North Pole in Meteorological history, since 1948Is there any data on the temperatures in Siberia? It looks like southern winds are keeping Siberia pretty warm these days, and that can't be good for the coming summer and the permafrost...QuoteDecember 31 2019, with Polar Vortex off center weighted temperature measuring -48 C CTNP over Ellesmere Island, the coldest such air ever measured for this date, surpassing all others by 4 degrees C (1948-2018).
Link >> https://eh2r.blogspot.com/2020/01/coldest-new-years-eve-cold-temperature.html
Other than for the climate and the animals, I don't care about the fires in Climate Change denying Australia with it's huge coal mines and right wing criminal nutcases. Let them burn in hell!Freegrass, it will also dry out Australia, so next fire season will be even worse than this one.
uni-hamburg amsr2uhh, atlantic side, dec25-jan2.
I think it's due to cracks and open leads. Apparently it was stormy there.It was, and.....
(Is your name pronounced as Neal, or Nile?)
Other than for the climate and the animals, I don't care about the fires in Climate Change denying Australia with it's huge coal mines and right wing criminal nutcases. Let them burn in hell!Freegrass, it will also dry out Australia, so next fire season will be even worse than this one.
Please bear in mind that you need to state the difference between hating the politics and not the people.Politicians are representatives of the people, aren't they?
So Niall Dollard basically means the money river?(Is your name pronounced as Neal, or Nile?)
Yes, it's sounds more like the African river. :)
But anyway back to the freezing season and I have to say I am surprised by ice conditions currently off the west Spitzbergen coast.
The West Spitzbergen current normally keeps this side of Svalbard ice-free. The current norwegian ice chart shows quite substantial ice present. Also the SSTs are quite low compared to the recent years at this time of year. The +4 C and above area (coloured magenta) is quite south of the island.
And yet others have highlighted that there is quite a bit of movement on the Atlantic side at present.
Questions: Is this a sign of a weakening of the West Spitzbergen ? Is it AMOC related ? I wonder what the sea temperature conditions are like at depth ?
It looks like it arrived from around the south tip of the island. But other years this would melt out quickly.
Please bear in mind that you need to state the difference between hating the politics and not the people.Politicians are representatives of the people, aren't they?
Politicians are representatives of the people, aren't they?
My empathy is with the poor people in poor countries that are currently already dying because of climate change that they had no part in.Please bear in mind that you need to state the difference between hating the politics and not the people.Politicians are representatives of the people, aren't they?
Not always.
And the politics of a country is not a reason to hate on the people who live there. People are people. Get some perspective and grow some empathy.
My empathy is with the poor people in poor countries that are currently already dying because of climate change that they had no part in.Please bear in mind that you need to state the difference between hating the politics and not the people.Politicians are representatives of the people, aren't they?
Not always.
And the politics of a country is not a reason to hate on the people who live there. People are people. Get some perspective and grow some empathy.
My empathy is with the animals that are dying, nature that is being destroyed, and entire ecosystems that are being destroyed because of the greed of my own kind, the white ass greedy monkeys.
You still don't get it what we're fighting for, do you? Climate change is gonna kill everyone on this planet. So excuse me for not feeling sorry for a few idiots that would STILL keep those coal mines open after their entire house burned down.
You still don't get it what we're fighting for, do you? Climate change is gonna kill everyone on this planet. So excuse me for not feeling sorry for a few idiots that would STILL keep those coal mines open after their entire house burned down.It's not going to kill everybody on the planet. What rubbish. But attitudes as those expressed here are responsible for killing a hell of a lot of people through the ages. The righteousness of the apocalypticists is the biggest threat to human societies everywhere.
It's not going to kill everybody on the planet
So utterly exhausted by alarmism.
Liars who profited from their lies about climate change and officials with sworn duties who lied to their people about climate change need to face justice, like Nazis. An example must be made.QuoteSo utterly exhausted by alarmism.
I'm much more exhausted by the increasing disasters. They will only get worse. It's like compound interest in reverse.
My empathy is with the poor people in poor countries that are currently already dying because of climate change that they had no part in.Please bear in mind that you need to state the difference between hating the politics and not the people.Politicians are representatives of the people, aren't they?
Not always.
And the politics of a country is not a reason to hate on the people who live there. People are people. Get some perspective and grow some empathy.
My empathy is with the animals that are dying, nature that is being destroyed, and entire ecosystems that are being destroyed because of the greed of my own kind, the white ass greedy monkeys.
You still don't get it what we're fighting for, do you? Climate change is gonna kill everyone on this planet. So excuse me for not feeling sorry for a few idiots that would STILL keep those coal mines open after their entire house burned down.
Bering Sea ice extent has expanded significantly with sustained north winds. Currently at 83% of 1981-2010 average extent from @NSIDC data, but a bit behind 2019. Change in the weather pattern is likely later this week that will slow #seaice growth. #akwx #Arctic @Climatologist49
Is there any data on the strength of the current in the Bering strait over the last few decades?Everyone was attacking my drunken message, but I didn't get any response on the question if there is any data available on the strength of the Bering Strait current over the last few decades? I would like to know if that current became stronger, or stayed the same in the last 50 years or so, but I can't find any graphs on Google..
Is there any data on the strength of the current in the Bering strait over the last few decades?Everyone was attacking my drunken message, but I didn't get any response on the question if there is any data available on the strength of the Bering Strait current over the last few decades? I would like to know if that current became stronger, or stayed the same in the last 50 years or so, but I can't find any graphs on Google..
Thanks Simon! This is what I was looking for.Is there any data on the strength of the current in the Bering strait over the last few decades?Everyone was attacking my drunken message, but I didn't get any response on the question if there is any data available on the strength of the Bering Strait current over the last few decades? I would like to know if that current became stronger, or stayed the same in the last 50 years or so, but I can't find any graphs on Google..
here (the format is a bit weird but the data is great):
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/HLD/Bstrait/BeringStraitSeasonalInterannualChange2017.html
Year-round in situ Bering Strait mooring data (1990-2015) document a long-term increase (~0.01Sv/yr whole record, ~0.02Sv since 2000) in the annual mean transport of Pacific waters into the Arctic. Between 2002 and present (2015), all annual mean transports (except 2005 and 2012) are greater than the previously accepted climatology (~0.8Sv).Does this mean that my theory could be true? That the inflow from the Bering strait increases as the AMOC slows down?
I've been ill for a few days, so sorry for not responding to complaints regarding Freegrass' 'drunken message'. I do not necessarily have a problem with the content of the message, although I believe these things can be expressed in more nuanced - or less drunken - ways. I do, however, have a problem with the derailment potential of such remarks in this central forum thread, as evidenced. So, sorry again, for not responding in time. And Freegrass, don't make such remarks over here, drunk or not, thanks.Hi Neven. So sorry to hear you've been ill. Hope you're feeling better right now!
...its still interesting to see peer-reviewed data showing this.I think we're already seeing the results during the melting and freezing season, no? It took ages for the Chukchi sea to freeze over, and during summer, most of the melting is on the Pacific side, while melting on the Atlantic side wasn't all that fierce last year.
...its still interesting to see peer-reviewed data showing this.I think we're already seeing the results during the melting and freezing season, no? It took ages for the Chukchi sea to freeze over, and during summer, most of the melting is on the Pacific side, while melting on the Atlantic side wasn't all that fierce last year.
The danger I see is that most of the methane hydrates are located on the side that's warming up the fastest. When more heat starts to enter the Arctic ocean from the Bering sea, this puts those hydrates at even more risks of melting much sooner...
But do you think that will actually be done?...its still interesting to see peer-reviewed data showing this.I think we're already seeing the results during the melting and freezing season, no? It took ages for the Chukchi sea to freeze over, and during summer, most of the melting is on the Pacific side, while melting on the Atlantic side wasn't all that fierce last year.
The danger I see is that most of the methane hydrates are located on the side that's warming up the fastest. When more heat starts to enter the Arctic ocean from the Bering sea, this puts those hydrates at even more risks of melting much sooner...
Several billion tonnes of cement poured into the strait and a Beluga trebuchet to prevent ecological disaster will fix the issue
But do you think that will actually be done?...its still interesting to see peer-reviewed data showing this.I think we're already seeing the results during the melting and freezing season, no? It took ages for the Chukchi sea to freeze over, and during summer, most of the melting is on the Pacific side, while melting on the Atlantic side wasn't all that fierce last year.
The danger I see is that most of the methane hydrates are located on the side that's warming up the fastest. When more heat starts to enter the Arctic ocean from the Bering sea, this puts those hydrates at even more risks of melting much sooner...
Several billion tonnes of cement poured into the strait and a Beluga trebuchet to prevent ecological disaster will fix the issue
Why cement? Just drop a lot of rocks into the Bering Strait until the flow decreases to a level that preserves the ice, but still allows marine life do its thing. It's maybe not so crazy at all...No. The law of unintended consequences would be bound to apply. AGW would still happen,
Did I just save the planet by closing the door of the fridge?
Funny, but true! :-\Why cement? Just drop a lot of rocks into the Bering Strait until the flow decreases to a level that preserves the ice, but still allows marine life do its thing. It's maybe not so crazy at all...It is a lunatic idea and thus is likely to be attempted.
Did I just save the planet by closing the door of the fridge?
If warmth can't enter the Arctic Ocean through the Strait then at other times cold can't exit the Arctic into the North Pacific. The Bering Sea would likely heat up even faster - perhaps large parts of Alaska and far East Russia too, accelerating permafrost melt and thus methane and CO2 emissions.
Yep, the current in Bering Strait is mostly northwards, though with occasional reversals. The surface is quite rarely outbound of Arctic, the bottom (c.50m deep) more often, but the net is usually northwards. Formerly Oyashio-current was more powerful when Ohotsk and Bering Sea had thicker ice.The big question is where that cold water would have most of its benefits; Cooling the arctic, or cooling the giant pacific ocean...
If someone did the dam there they'd better open it when ever current is southbound, I guess.
Freegrass and all, having just been told a no-no about derailment of this thread, please avoid further derailment by the Bering Strait dam idea. It has its own thread (with 181 posts!), but in any case this is certainly not the place for such discussion.Thanks Oren. Good to know my idea isn't all that crazy after all. I'll read up on the topic over there. Thanks!
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1545.msg76945.html (https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1545.msg76945.html)
If warmth can't enter the Arctic Ocean through the Strait then at other times cold can't exit the Arctic into the North Pacific. The Bering Sea would likely heat up even faster - perhaps large parts of Alaska and far East Russia too, accelerating permafrost melt and thus methane and CO2 emissions.
I actually think that by stopping hot water to enter from the Bering sea, that the cooling of the Arctic would help to protect the permafrost.
The flow of the water is always into the Arctic ocean, and so no cold water ever flows from the Arctic Ocean into the Bering Sea, unless there is a southern wind. (this needs a fact check) So by stopping hot water to enter the Arctic, you keep it cool, which will help to keep our planet cool.
AGW will indeed still continue. It needs to be stopped. But maybe we can stop a disaster by doing this. It's cheap, easy, and low impact on marine life IMHO. Although I'm sure a lot more educated people than me will have something to say about this...
gnnng sdlkto vlspto ;)Nice synoptic view. Took me a while to figure out the legend - each frame is a day starting in September 2019 to Jan. 6, 2020.
I cribbed this Worldview set-up from Uniquorn's, in the Megacrack thread. Then I zoomed in on the ice east of Barrow. From this view of four days ago to today, this "Brightness Temperature" band is so cool I think it's of general interest. In case folks didn't know Worldview allows us to see in the dark this way. It's obscured by atmospheric conditions like an optical image (only worse -- through a stein of beer, darkly), but the clearings tell thrilling tales of ice dynamics:
https://go.nasa.gov/39PbQGg
Seriously?ps .. please don't all but the shit dumper's jump ship .. there is a long way to go to the melting season .It was never about the videos I posted, was it, you little shit? You just don't want me to post anything at all, isn't it, you miserable little shit?
Aren't the poles the only places where the planet can lose its heat? I'm thinking that if there would be more ice, that the Arctic would be colder and able to release more heat into space, overall cooling the planet, and giving us more time before the feedback loops kick in and the climate runs out of our control.
The Arctic is heating up faster than any other place on earth, so cooling it down seems logical to me. And I don't think this would heat up the rest of the planet more.
I'm still wondering what has changed to increase the ice in the Barent Sea over the last year.Perhaps the ice is more mobile. osi-saf drift sep21-jan6
Yeah, when I wrote that I was already doubting if it was correct. I remembered something I read here about cooling at the poles. I can't remember what it was.Aren't the poles the only places where the planet can lose its heat? I'm thinking that if there would be more ice, that the Arctic would be colder and able to release more heat into space, overall cooling the planet, and giving us more time before the feedback loops kick in and the climate runs out of our control.
The Arctic is heating up faster than any other place on earth, so cooling it down seems logical to me. And I don't think this would heat up the rest of the planet more.
This is entirely wrong. Hot things emit more heat than cool things. The low latitudes gain heat through insolation. The whole planet is losing heat all the time, more rapidly at the low latitudes as they are warmer. The disparity in insolation heating causes the atmosphere and oceans to operate as heat pumps, transferring heat from the low latitudes to high latitudes and increasing the overall efficiency of heat loss. If you stop the transfer of heat to the poles you reduce the ability of the earth to lose heat.
There was a strong northern wind blowing over the Barents sea for a long time at the end of this summer, and that cooled it down a lot.I'm still wondering what has changed to increase the ice in the Barent Sea over the last year.Perhaps the ice is more mobile. osi-saf drift sep21-jan6
I'm still wondering what has changed to increase the ice in the Barent Sea over the last year.Perhaps the ice is more mobile. osi-saf drift sep21-jan6
There was a strong northern wind blowing over the Barents sea for a long time at the end of this summer, and that cooled it down a lot.
Bering Sea ice extent growth in @NSIDC data has slowed in recent days as winds have turned more southerly. Extent is just above 2019 and just below the 1981-2020 median. Weather upcoming week will not be favorable for much #seaice extent change. #akwx #Arctic @Climatologist49
Ponds nearshore today. And this is before the increase in insolation that will come at the end of the month when the sun comes up.
https://seaice.alaska.edu/gi/observatories/barrow_webcam/ …
Shorefast #seaice broke off at Utqiaġvik a couple days ago. In mid-January. Tough to work on this ice. #akwx
Those ponds, together with "Last weeks 7-day hindsight means GIF (anomalies)" posted by Blumencraft just few posts above, confirm one big suspicion i had for this freezing season: namely, the huge winter mode shift for Arctic and subarctic regions. Which shift is more heat and moisture in the system causing more clouds remaining for much of the winter, which clouds then dramatically slow down winter-time heat loss from both the surface and lower athmosphere. Which slowing further massively extends duration and scale of "thickly clouded" areas - a runaway process.
Obviously, any prolonged periods of massively dwarfed heat-loss process in Arctic and adjucent regions - will have significant impact on following melting season(s), but there is yet one much more serious implication: the "albedo connection" as one may perhaps call it. The warmer things are, the less places are snow-covered by the time insolation starts to be a thing again (and the less snowcover's thickness / brightness is there in places which still retain some snowcover, too). Just like ArcticMelt2 just mentioned: "when the sun comes up", which for sub-arctic regions is already pretty much "now" or "very soon".
Right about now, we have much of the Arctic cloudy (good bye, "polar desert", eh), and even some parts of it - between Iceland and UK/Scandinavia - getting few millimeters of rain. If those cyclones would keep coming same way, then together with seriously positive SST anomalies around Scandinavia and all along US eastern coast - then i wouldn't be surprised to see Atlantic side of the Arctic going blue much much earlier than ever before, later this year.
Average surface wind anomalies during the past 12 months: (source (https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/cgi-bin/data/composites/comp.day.pl?var=Vector+Wind&level=Surface&iy%5B1%5D=&im%5B1%5D=&id%5B1%5D=&iy%5B2%5D=&im%5B2%5D=&id%5B2%5D=&iy%5B3%5D=&im%5B3%5D=&id%5B3%5D=&iy%5B4%5D=&im%5B4%5D=&id%5B4%5D=&iy%5B5%5D=&im%5B5%5D=&id%5B5%5D=&iy%5B6%5D=&im%5B6%5D=&id%5B6%5D=&iy%5B7%5D=&im%5B7%5D=&id%5B7%5D=&iy%5B8%5D=&im%5B8%5D=&id%5B8%5D=&iy%5B9%5D=&im%5B9%5D=&id%5B9%5D=&iy%5B10%5D=&im%5B10%5D=&id%5B10%5D=&iy%5B11%5D=&im%5B11%5D=&id%5B11%5D=&iy%5B12%5D=&im%5B12%5D=&id%5B12%5D=&iy%5B13%5D=&im%5B13%5D=&id%5B13%5D=&iy%5B14%5D=&im%5B14%5D=&id%5B14%5D=&iy%5B15%5D=&im%5B15%5D=&id%5B15%5D=&iy%5B16%5D=&im%5B16%5D=&id%5B16%5D=&iy%5B17%5D=&im%5B17%5D=&id%5B17%5D=&iy%5B18%5D=&im%5B18%5D=&id%5B18%5D=&iy%5B19%5D=&im%5B19%5D=&id%5B19%5D=&iy%5B20%5D=&im%5B20%5D=&id%5B20%5D=&monr1=1&dayr1=1&monr2=12&dayr2=31&iyr%5B1%5D=2019&filenamein=&plotlabel=&lag=0&labelc=Color&labels=Shaded&type=2&scale=&label=0&skip_vector=1&cint=0.1&lowr=0.6&highr=2.7&istate=0&proj=Custom&xlat1=60&xlat2=80&xlon1=0&xlon2=70&custproj=Northern+Hemisphere+Polar+Stereographic&level1=1000mb&level2=10mb&Submit=Create+Plot))Thanks Steven. Here comparing noaa/esrl sep-dec wind anomaly with jan1 uni-hamburg amsr2, 2013-2020. click to run.
The one exception I have with your sharp analysis is that a wetter Arctic results in more snow. We might see a delay in ice melt because so much snow needs to melt first.That snow is a very bad thing for the permafrost. just like the high temperatures in Siberia. I guess we'll be seeing a lot of methane being released this coming summer.
While NH snow cover extent is much below average, snow water equivalent is much above average. Where there is snow, it is much deeper than normal.
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2876.100.html#lastPost
If there is precipitation in the Arctic, it is falling as snow.
Interesting.
What are the best ways to see cloudiness in the arctic?
Interesting.
What are the best ways to see cloudiness in the arctic?
https://climatereanalyzer.org/reanalysis/monthly_tseries/
Here is a plot showing the opposite of what is claimed about increasing cloudiness.
Interesting.
What are the best ways to see cloudiness in the arctic?
https://climatereanalyzer.org/reanalysis/monthly_tseries/
Here is a plot showing the opposite of what is claimed about increasing cloudiness.
Here is a plot showing the opposite of what is claimed about increasing cloudiness.
Here is a plot showing the opposite of what is claimed about increasing cloudiness.
That looks to be a yearly tally. What about seasonally?
I used to live in a city in BC which is ranked as one of the sunniest in Canada. But it's simultaneously one of the cloudiest - in the winter.
Very interesting. Cloud cover is not everything of course, and in the Arctic, low-lying fog is quite common and probably not counted as cloud. I wonder if anybody is qualified to claim anything about changes in fog prevalence in the Arctic?
Also it'd be interesting to see if humidity has changed (or rather, the total amount of water vapor - which I presume has increased).
I was reading this last week, seems pretty relevant
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-34450-3
Bering Sea #seaice extent fell by more than 20% in the past week and as of January 18th was at 67% of the 1981-2010 average. Lack of ice is especially notable off the Chukotka coast. Quite likely to see expansion of the extent upcoming week. #akwx #Arctic
@Climatologist49
GISS December 2019 land-ocean temperature anomaliesI'm wondering if the fires of this summer and the heat of this winter in Siberia could be related to each other. The CO2 from those fires would have gone around the globe already, right? So could there be some other effect? Like maybe darker soil from the fires that soaked up more heat? Or maybe the peat fires? Just wondering.
https://twitter.com/zlabeQuoteBering Sea #seaice extent fell by more than 20% in the past week and as of January 18th was at 67% of the 1981-2010 average. Lack of ice is especially notable off the Chukotka coast. Quite likely to see expansion of the extent upcoming week. #akwx #Arctic
@Climatologist49
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EOqSdbiU8AARHCK?format=jpg&name=small)
Given the conditions of the Bering in early 2012, extensive cover would just seem like a bad omen.When sea ice forms, salt is released. Does the formation of more sea ice in the Bering sea increase the salinity of the water that is flowing through the Bering strait in winter?
Its probably the one place id be genuinely concerned if extent was high, even though that's just superstition and not backed by any evidence..
https://twitter.com/zlabeQuoteBering Sea #seaice extent fell by more than 20% in the past week and as of January 18th was at 67% of the 1981-2010 average. Lack of ice is especially notable off the Chukotka coast. Quite likely to see expansion of the extent upcoming week. #akwx #Arctic
@Climatologist49
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EOqSdbiU8AARHCK?format=jpg&name=small)
Given the conditions of the Bering in early 2012, extensive cover would just seem like a bad omen.
Its probably the one place id be genuinely concerned if extent was high, even though that's just superstition and not backed by any evidence..
I'm new and not up to speed on all the intricacies of the Arctic melting and refreezing but wouldn't the salinity concentrations and the dilution of the Arctic seas from the vast amounts of freshwater entering the Arctic from melting glaciers (especially Greenland) cause a significant increase in ice extent since the less saline water freezes more easily (higher temperature) than the albeit thinner and more prone to melting the next melt season?
Aren't the poles the only places where the planet can lose its heat? I'm thinking that if there would be more ice, that the Arctic would be colder and able to release more heat into space, overall cooling the planet, and giving us more time before the feedback loops kick in and the climate runs out of our control.
The Arctic is heating up faster than any other place on earth, so cooling it down seems logical to me. And I don't think this would heat up the rest of the planet more.
Aren't the poles the only places where the planet can lose its heat? I'm thinking that if there would be more ice, that the Arctic would be colder and able to release more heat into space, overall cooling the planet, and giving us more time before the feedback loops kick in and the climate runs out of our control.
The Arctic is heating up faster than any other place on earth, so cooling it down seems logical to me. And I don't think this would heat up the rest of the planet more.
My guess is that, based on my understanding of thermodynamics, more heat is lost in areas with combinations of highest temperature and lowest relative humidity (e.g. deserts, which typically have the highest spread between high and low temperatures on any given day). In such areas there is the greatest differential between the heat source (earth) and heat sink (outer space), coupled with the lowest combination of greenhouse gases (water being by far the most important).
In the wintertime Arctic, cracks in the ice called "leads" expose the warm ocean directly to the cold air, with some leads only a few meters wide and some kilometers wide. They play a critical role in the Arctic surface energy balance. If we want to know how much the ice is going to grow in winter, we need to understand the impacts of leads.
The extreme contrast in temperature between the warm ocean and the cold air creates a flow of heat and moisture from the ocean to the atmosphere. This flow provides a lead with its own weather system which creates low-level clouds. The prevailing view has been that more leads are associated with more low-level clouds during winter. But University of Utah atmospheric scientists noticed something strange in their study of these leads: when lead occurrence was greater, there were fewer, not more clouds.
Nice to see you around, Jim! :)
The overall motion of the icepack over the last three weeks is better described as a 'Siberian Slam' against the CAA than TransPolar Drift. Note the boundary between FYI and MYI remains quite distinct and easy to track.
My guess is that, based on my understanding of thermodynamics, more heat is lost in areas with combinations of highest temperature difference and lowest relative humidity (e.g. Arctic regions, which typically have the highest spread between high and low temperatures on any given year). In such areas there is the greatest differential between the heat source (earth) and heat sink (outer space), coupled with the lowest combination of greenhouse gases (water being by far the most important).
(e.g. deserts, which typically have the highest spread between high and low temperatures on any given day).
Bering Sea #seaice extent from NSIDC is slowly increasing, but remains below the long term average & last year. But extent isn't everything. Sustained cold weather near the Alaska coast since mid-Dec helping to thicken and stabilize nearshore ice. #akwx #Arctic @Climatologist49
https://twitter.com/AlaskaWx/status/1221476994849873921QuoteBering Sea #seaice extent from NSIDC is slowly increasing, but remains below the long term average & last year. But extent isn't everything. Sustained cold weather near the Alaska coast since mid-Dec helping to thicken and stabilize nearshore ice. #akwx #Arctic @Climatologist49
Yas, yas. Ftb gave an eg. of daily cycle of extreme radiative heat gain/loss, I thought the Arctic qualifies for the same in an annual cycle. Probably variation of this annual cycle is more impactful over the planetary weather/climate though than daily cycle on desertic areas.My guess is that, based on my understanding of thermodynamics, more heat is lost in areas with combinations of highest temperature difference and lowest relative humidity (e.g. Arctic regions, which typically have the highest spread between high and low temperatures on any given year). In such areas there is the greatest differential between the heat source (earth) and heat sink (outer space), coupled with the lowest combination of greenhouse gases (water being by far the most important).
So you quote Feeltheburn almost verbatim, only changing the paranthesis:(e.g. deserts, which typically have the highest spread between high and low temperatures on any given day).
The point being? But since you seem to dispute Feeltheburn's post (albeit in a rather underhand way), I was tempted to do a Google search on "where does earth lose most heat" and the first link (https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/EnergyBalance/page4.php) gave me this underlying image, from Nasa.
Seems that Feeltheburn's understanding was spot on, at least for the month of September 2008. And I'd be very much surprised if the Arctic (or the Antarctic for that sake) would show enough heat loss in their respective summers to trump the tropics or the mid-latitude desert bands on an annual basis.
Sunday to Sunday ice drift map.Thanks Blumenkraft. Can you also post the drift anomaly?
Bering Sea looking beautiful at the moment. Extent racing away to the sunlit uplands :)
It's frustrating that I can't remember exactly what it was all about. Could it be that it was something that in winter the arctic loses a lot of heat because of a thinner atmosphere?My guess is that, based on my understanding of thermodynamics, more heat is lost in areas with combinations of highest temperature difference and lowest relative humidity (e.g. Arctic regions, which typically have the highest spread between high and low temperatures on any given year). In such areas there is the greatest differential between the heat source (earth) and heat sink (outer space), coupled with the lowest combination of greenhouse gases (water being by far the most important).
So you quote Feeltheburn almost verbatim, only changing the paranthesis:(e.g. deserts, which typically have the highest spread between high and low temperatures on any given day).
The point being? But since you seem to dispute Feeltheburn's post (albeit in a rather underhand way), I was tempted to do a Google search on "where does earth lose most heat" and the first link (https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/EnergyBalance/page4.php) gave me this underlying image, from Nasa.
Seems that Feeltheburn's understanding was spot on, at least for the month of September 2008. And I'd be very much surprised if the Arctic (or the Antarctic for that sake) would show enough heat loss in their respective summers to trump the tropics or the mid-latitude desert bands on an annual basis.
Or am I missing/misinterpreting something?
Yas, yas. Ftb gave an eg. of daily cycle of extreme radiative heat gain/loss, I thought the Arctic qualifies for the same in an annual cycle. Probably variation of this annual cycle is more impactful over the planetary weather/climate though than daily cycle on desertic areas.Well you thought wrong, the annual arctic cycle is not "more impactful" and if you think otherwise, plese substantiate.
Im not good at rhetoric, I leave that to you.Yas, yas. Ftb gave an eg. of daily cycle of extreme radiative heat gain/loss, I thought the Arctic qualifies for the same in an annual cycle. Probably variation of this annual cycle is more impactful over the planetary weather/climate though than daily cycle on desertic areas.Well you thought wrong, the annual arctic cycle is not "more impactful" and if you think otherwise, plese substantiate.
Gandul, we are getting somewhat off-topic here.Im not good at rhetoric, I leave that to you.Yas, yas. Ftb gave an eg. of daily cycle of extreme radiative heat gain/loss, I thought the Arctic qualifies for the same in an annual cycle. Probably variation of this annual cycle is more impactful over the planetary weather/climate though than daily cycle on desertic areas.Well you thought wrong, the annual arctic cycle is not "more impactful" and if you think otherwise, plese substantiate.
deserts have the same albedo in daytime than 40 years ago, Arctic does not, it absorbs much more heat in its daytime (summer). Deserts lose similar heat during night than they used to 40 years ago. Arctic night (Winter) is very complex, some winters it acts as an alleviation of the record heat accumulated in summer; some recent winters, however, the venting has been blocked by excess humidity, leading to a poor ice recovery in winter.
FTB gives a good example. But you want to convince who of what? Of course the Arctic radiative heat cycle is more important for climate, at least as a manifestation of its change but also cause it feeds back in atmospheric and oceanic changes.
Just look at Fall temperatures in Alaska for the last 40 years and STFU.
Jim -The extra volume this year is in the Barents (and the Kara), as can be seen in Jim's image based on Cryosat/SMOS, as well as in Wipneus' diff map based on PIOMAS. The missing volume this year is next to the CAA, again seen both in Cryosat/SMOS data and in PIOMAS. These two sources are very different (one is mostly measured, one is mostly modeled), but are in general agreement. I do not expect a January bombshell, but the melting season could become interesting should there be an early meltout of the Barents.
Both Thickness and Extent seem to be much less in 2020 than 2019 in those images. But the December PIOMAS Volume data show Dec 31 2019 only about 3% below Dec 31 2018.
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,119.msg242997.html#msg242997 (https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,119.msg242997.html#msg242997)
The dramatic difference in Thickness and Extent in those maps look like a lot more than a 3% Volume decline.
Or is the January PIOMAS going to deliver a bombshell? But that also seems unlikely given robust Extent gains in recent weeks. And there has only been 19 days between Dec 31, 2019 and the Jan. 19, 2020 graph.
CryoSat vs. PIOMAS difference doesn't explain it either, since both images are CryoSat. Something is not lining up. The only explanation I can think of is a re-calibration of CryoSat. But I don't have any info pointing to that.
Bottom line: the 2019 to 2020 difference in those maps is too huge to believe. If it is real then it looks the Arctic is going to get blitzed in the 2020 melt season.
Or am I missing/misinterpreting something?
The extra volume this year is in the Barents (and the Kara)
Not unexpectedly that meant that ice in the northern Barents Sea was slow to melt out in the summer of 2019, whilst after a fast start the melt in the Beaufort Sea suffered a “brief hiatus” in June before ultimately melting out almost completely.
I've done my due diligence this morning (UTC), and there's still a total absence of any ice >= 4m thick to be seen on the most recent CS2/SMOS reanalysis. Chapter and verse over at:
http://GreatWhiteCon.info/2020/01/wheres-the-thickest-arctic-sea-ice-gone/
However, the sea ice extent this year is greater than 8 of the past 10 years.
It would have been nice to have a month year counter pasted over some continent.
However, the sea ice extent this year is greater than 8 of the past 10 years.
So sea ice thickness is irrelevant to your potential prognostications?
No. Just less relevant. Neither yields a perfect correlation, but extent does better.Correlation of what with what?
Possibly. However, the sea ice extent this year is greater than 8 of the past 10 years. The only two years with greater extent were 2013 & 14, which also had the highest minima over the past decade.
Is there an index that relates ice thickness to melt resistance?Of course, it is not that it requires less energy to melt, but it enables faster heat transfer. Thinner ice permits direct solar radiation to reach water beneath ice. Thin ice also breaks down more easily into smaller chunks, eventually melting out by top, bottom, lateral melting and wave washing. It is also increasingly first year ice, which is easier to melt than multi year ice.
It would be interesting to see a calculation of the melt resistance for the total ASI melt resistance for standardized month/day dates compared across years.
That might be a better indicator than even Volume for how much change has occurred to the ASI. For example -- A million km3 of ice in 2020 might be more vulnerable to melt (require less melting energy) than a million km3 of ASI in 2010.
Last year over on the Nares Strait thread, we were saying that the ice north of Greenland in the Lincoln Sea must be thin as it kept fragmenting and there was no arch in the strait. Yet the 2019 chart above appears to show thicker ice above Greenland than this year.
Over the winter of 2018/19 ASCAT revealed that there was a relentless movement of multi-year ice towards both the North Atlantic and the Beaufort Sea. Perhaps a significant amount of the multi-year ice that survived the winter of 2018/19 has now simply melted away in warm water, to be replaced by much less robust first year ice in the area between the North Pole and the Siberian coast?
Is there some formula for translating the thickness of a single chunk of ASI ice into a relative or absolute melt resistance value?
Possibly. However, the sea ice extent this year is greater than 8 of the past 10 years. The only two years with greater extent were 2013 & 14, which also had the highest minima over the past decade.
Looking at extent figures now (Jan 27th) is not much guarantee of a high minimum come September.
Example 1 : 2007 . The joint second lowest min on record. Yet extent on Jan 27th 2007 was higher than it is currently in 2020. A lot can happen.
Example 2 : 2012. The lowest year of all. Jaxa extent on Jan 27th 2012 was only 115 k less than extent is currently
Re the ice thickness charts, I am not that confident in what they show. Some are better than others.
Last year over on the Nares Strait thread, we were saying that the ice north of Greenland in the Lincoln Sea must be thin as it kept fragmenting and there was no arch in the strait. Yet the 2019 chart above appears to show thicker ice above Greenland than this year.
Instead last December the arch did form. Was the ice than thicker this winter contrary to what the charts indicate.
Or is arch formation more to do with tides, currents and surface winds coming together at the right time rather than how thick the ice is ?
XY Plot of NSIDC Average January extent versus the following September's min from year 2006 onwards.
TBH I think it is a bit of a meaningless plot
Agreed, I was conflating "statistical insignificance" with meaningless. Yes, there is value in knowing that something doesn't work.
XY Plot of NSIDC Average January extent versus the following September's min from year 2006 onwards.
TBH I think it is a bit of a meaningless plot because it takes no account of ice thickness and there are so many other factors that can affect ice between January and September.
Over this time period a january average of circa 13.7 was followed by a range of Sept Mins of anywhere between 3.39 and 5.05 million km2
Ah yes, a classic example of cherry-picking the data ...
binnthoSounds complicated. Besides grixm seems to have done the necessaries
To resolve the earlier discussion, can you graph January Extent on X axis vs. September Extent on Y axis for 1979-2019? Even better if you show not just the slope equation but the R2, F and df (all included in the output table if you are using Excel). That would let us estimate statistical significance.
Here I have plotted the normalized average extents in january, februrary and march, compared to september. Normalized meaning the value divided by the average value for the whole year. This means that the long-term trend of general melting is removed.
There seems to indeed be a strong correlation of high extent early season = low extent late season, for all three months graphed.
The March-Sept correlation is middling
I for one am surprised that there is any correlation at all. And if this is real and not statistical noise, what could be the mechanism behind it?
I for one am surprised that there is any correlation at all. And if this is real and not statistical noise, what could be the mechanism behind it?
A possible mechanism? The smaller the floating ice "cap" on the Arctic Ocean, the more open water is able to radiate heat to space, especially once the sun sets for a long period - six months at the pole, less further south but still substantial (112 days at Svalbard). Perhaps the greater amount heat that "bleeds" from the ocean during this period influences the January extent?
Which brings me to a niggle: Your graph for January predicts a September average of 4.3 Mkm2 and not a September minimum of 4.3. Correct me if I am wrong! NSIDC September average for 2012 was an amazing 3.6 but both 2007 and 2019 came in at very close to 4.3.
Here I have plotted the normalized average extents in january, februrary and march, compared to september. Normalized meaning the value divided by the average value for the whole year. This means that the long-term trend of general melting is removed.
This.Here I have plotted the normalized average extents in january, februrary and march, compared to september. Normalized meaning the value divided by the average value for the whole year. This means that the long-term trend of general melting is removed.
Not really. Your method is skewed by the fact that the long-term extent losses are happening more rapidly in September than in January/February/March.
September extent in the last few years is about 40% lower than in the 1980s, whereas March extent has decreased by only 10%. So your "normalized" March extent has an upward trend over the last few decades, whereas the normalized September extent has a downward trend. So it's not surprising that you get a negative correlation between them. But that correlation is spurious.
A more meaningful method is to detrend the data (see e.g. here (https://youtu.be/2-nMsoE_in0?t=1) for some background on detrending). It turns out that the correlation between the detrended March extent and the detrended September extent is very weak: the correlation coefficient is -0.029.
Walrus:
You mean million sq. km.?
January was a persistently cold month across nearly all of Alaska, though only a few records were set. Much of mainland Alaska was the coldest January since 2012 but Panhandle was coldest since 2004. Lots of snow some near-coastal areas
Kodiak saw the 5th coldest January in more than a century of records: average temperature was 21.9F (-5.6C). This is 8.6F (4.8C) below 1981-2010 normal. January in the 21st century has seen big swings, with 3 of the coldest and 2 of the warmest.
The January average temperature at Bethel of -5.5F (-20.8C) was 12.1F (6.7C) below 1981-2010 normal but not low enough to break into the top ten coldest. There is no trend at all for January temps at Bethel past 95 years.
Bering Sea #seaice extent up to about 87% of 1981-2010 average for the start of February in @NSIDC data. Stormier weather pattern already underway for the region. This is likely to slow growth & modify ice distribution in the coming week.
Average #seaice extent in the Bering Sea for January from @NSIDC data was a bit lower than 2019 and only 81% of the 1981-2010 average. Weather was favorable for ice: a late start to ice-up & above average #sst slowed ice growth.
The NCEP/NCAR (R1) Reanalysis agrees with the JRA55, January 2020 was the 2nd warmest on record behind 2016. For the Lower 48, it was the 5th warmest since 1948 (and probably top 5 to 8 since 1900). For Europe, possibly 2nd warmest.
Therefore, I experimented with instead normalizing the years to their predicted average extent from a linear regression of all the years.
Your method is skewed by the fact that the long-term extent losses are happening more rapidly in September than in January/February/March.
September extent in the last few years is about 40% lower than in the 1980s, whereas March extent has decreased by only 10%. So your "normalized" March extent has an upward trend over the last few decades, whereas the normalized September extent has a downward trend. So it's not surprising that you get a negative correlation between them. But that correlation is spurious.
A more meaningful method is to detrend the data (see e.g. here (https://youtu.be/2-nMsoE_in0?t=1) for some background on detrending). It turns out that the correlation between the detrended March extent and the detrended September extent is very weak: the correlation coefficient is -0.029.
Therefore, I experimented with instead normalizing the years to their predicted average extent from a linear regression of all the years.Your method is skewed by the fact that the long-term extent losses are happening more rapidly in September than in January/February/March.
September extent in the last few years is about 40% lower than in the 1980s, whereas March extent has decreased by only 10%. So your "normalized" March extent has an upward trend over the last few decades, whereas the normalized September extent has a downward trend. So it's not surprising that you get a negative correlation between them. But that correlation is spurious.
A more meaningful method is to detrend the data (see e.g. here (https://youtu.be/2-nMsoE_in0?t=1) for some background on detrending). It turns out that the correlation between the detrended March extent and the detrended September extent is very weak: the correlation coefficient is -0.029.
Many thanks to grixm and Steven et al. for wrestling with the numbers. It looks like the jury is still out on this one. While counter-intuitve [more Extent early leads to less 8 months later (Jan-Sept), 7 (Feb-Sept.), or 6 March-Sept.)], the insulating ice theory at least sounds plausible.
[..]
The Winter of 16/17 was very warm in the Arctic and the ice was crazy record low in volume starting the 2017 summer season. However, that was a warm Arctic / cold continents winter with very deep snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere, especially Siberia. Thus, Spring and summer were really late, and there were not many warm punches from the continents, rather the contrary.
This winter is kind of the opposite with this very persistent and strong Polar Vortex. However, note that the polar vortex has displaced the Arctic warm anomalies accumulated in Summer and vented out in Fall, to the high and mid latitudes of the NH. In fact it is really warm relatively speaking, probably one of the warmest Januaries for the NH.
There is an astounding lack of snow cover in Europe, and also a relative lack in America. The heat may come to the Arctic with a vengeance in the form of a very early NH Spring. Pray that it snows soon. An early Spring due to lack of NH snow cover is for me probably the most determining factor to start a warm melting season. True that Arctic winter is being cold and more benign for the ice but Wipneus just showed PIOMAS volume is 5th lowest in record. Not really impressive.
Edit: Zack Labe reports a January anomaly of 3C !! Not sure if that is global or only Europe...
RE grixm
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2888.msg247928.html#msg247928 (https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2888.msg247928.html#msg247928)
I thought we were done with this, but I have another favor to ask. Can you extend the early vs Sept. Extent comparison charts to April-August?
You showed above that there is no correlation of March to September, but surely there must be correlation by August. This is probably in a journal article somewhere, but your charts are lovely and can be up to date to include 2019. Seeing the data point spread would be really interesting.
For sporting interest, I'll wager such charts would show R2 around:
April 10%
May 20%
June 30%
July 50%
August 80%
And if anybody did the same for Volume, that would be icing on the cake.
PS in case you zipped past binntho's post in the data thread at
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2975.msg247842.html#msg247842 (https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2975.msg247842.html#msg247842)
The articles he cites there provide really nice long-term context for ASI variability and current situation. Good stuff.
Wipneus just showed PIOMAS volume is 5th lowest in record. Not really impressive.
There is an astounding lack of snow cover in Europe, and also a relative lack in America. The heat may come to the Arctic with a vengeance in the form of a very early NH Spring.
However, the snow water equivalent (the total volume) is significantly above the 1998-2011 average.
As I have stated numerous times, let’s see how things look in May before jumping to any hasty conclusions about what the 2020 Arctic sea ice melting season might bring?
In february and march the lower latitudes are more important in terms of albedo while the higher latitudes snow cover become important in May/June. We have now extra heat absorbing in 3 mln sq km of land
There has been significant focus on the lack of snow extent cover, at lower latitude and easier to melt regions, even though we have near record snow/ice volume in the more difficult to melt regions.
In february and march the lower latitudes are more important in terms of albedo while the higher latitudes snow cover become important in May/June. We have now extra heat absorbing in 3 mln sq km of land
There has been significant focus on the lack of snow extent cover, at lower latitude and easier to melt regions, even though we have near record snow/ice volume in the more difficult to melt regions.
Northern hemisphere snow cover is well below average this winter.Fair enough, if the volume at high latitudes is so high, we'll see. One thing though, the second plot you show, snow volume, is every year the same anomalously high. Not very useful.
...There is an astounding lack of snow cover in Europe, and also a relative lack in America. The heat may come to the Arctic with a vengeance in the form of a very early NH Spring.
To the contrary, we may have an extended 2019/2020 freezing season. The 2020 northern hemisphere sea ice melting season may get off to a slow start.
There has been significant focus on the lack of snow extent cover, at lower latitude and easier to melt regions, even though we have near record snow/ice volume in the more difficult to melt regions.
Snow area in January ranked third in the 21st century after 2007 and 2014.I assume you mean third lowest? What's the source of the data?
One thing though, the second plot you show, snow volume, is every year the same anomalously high. Not very useful.
What's the source of the data?
You showed above that there is no correlation of March to September, but surely there must be correlation by August.
for the ice but Wipneus just showed PIOMAS volume is 5th lowest in record. Not really impressive.
Edit: Zack Labe reports a January anomaly of 3C !! Not sure if that is global or only Europe...
Considering that.... volume is 5th lowest that tells me at least a big story
you would never guess there is a thread for northern hemisphere snow cover .. b.c.
Considering that.... volume is 5th lowest that tells me at least a big story
That depends on which metric you look at. At the risk of repeating myself (https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,3000):
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=3000.0;attach=142715;image)
"The coldest January on Kodiak is the forerunner of the big summer ice loss? Top 10 includes January 2007 and 2012."
I think there might be some truth to that. Alaska is cold during the winter and Europe/lower 48 US is warm when the polar vortex is well behaved and no "cold-spills" reach them. Due to this there is usually little snowcover in NH midlatitudes so when spring comes they should warm up fast. This could of course lead to a fast meltout of the periphery in the Arctic which - given good weather - would lead to fast ice loss especially as there is not much old ice nowadays.
There are many ifs though...but I think we have a good chance of seeing some "fireworks" during this summer in the Arctic
January 2020 was plenty cold in Alaska, but it did not crack the bottom ten for Alaska over the past 96 years. There is not a significant linear trend over that time, but there is a well defined "step" increase in the mid-1970s. #akwx #Arctic @Climatologist49
Actually I looked at that chart again and it suggests the start of 2013 has the lowest volume on record.
Actually I looked at that chart again and it suggests the start of 2013 has the lowest volume on record.
From the summer of 2013:
http://GreatWhiteCon.info/resources/arctic-sea-ice-images/summer-2013-images/
The theory that crysosat confuses heavy snow cover for volume could well be the case here as lots of snowfall must of fell onto the ice pack giveen how much moisture headed upto the pole that winter.
Not often you see a 100% expectation of below normal temperatures over such a large swath of the Canadian far NorthI think it's technically in the 90-100% range. But still unusual for sure.
Together with the latest CS2/SMOS volume. The "blip" at the end of January will probably disappear when the "reanalysed" data reaches that date:
The NRT Level-1 data to the CryoSat-2 sea ice product is missing several orbits, mostly in the Russian Arctic.
Bering Sea #seaice continues to increase & total extent is now almost at the 1981-2010 median for the date from @NSIDC data. Bering ice at the highest extent for early February since 2013. Increase this week mostly near Chukotka. #akwx #Arctic @Climatologist49 @KNOMnews @KYUKNews
Yes a Cyclone from the Atlantic is heading to the Pacific straight from East to West. Because the CTNP, the North American Cold Temperature North Pole vortice is well South of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. Is quite warm over Ellesmere Island at present compared to further South. Even though Ellesmere is still plunged in 24 hour darkness. All in all, 19-20 winter is no recent year pattern repeat. This feature announces more strangeness to come.
Is vortice a word? Vortex singular; vortices plural, no?Does the name of a company count as a word?
Early maximum extent?
Early maximum extent?
Who'd have thunk it? "Snow White"!
http://GreatWhiteCon.info/2020/01/wheres-the-thickest-arctic-sea-ice-gone/#comment-315058
Early maximum extent?
Who'd have thunk it? "Snow White"!
http://GreatWhiteCon.info/2020/01/wheres-the-thickest-arctic-sea-ice-gone/#comment-315058
Jim - Are you calling it the maximum extent already? Yes or No - Or are you "kind of" in case it does happen and you can say you told us so?
From one of my posts on the extent threadIncisive as ever.
<snippage>
A messy picture, being the gathering strength of the annual battle of warmth from the rising sun fighting the bitter cold of the Arctic Ocean (as we are now 50+ days after the winter solstice). To add to that, the extra strong polar vortex in the Atlantic spawned Storm Ciara and now Storm Dennis which look like it has caused, is causing and will cause havoc in the Atlantic Front.
This is the time of year when area and extent go up and down so much as to make projections a mugs' game.
__________________________
When looking beyond 5 days the crystal ball goes foggy.
It is about 4 weeks before the average date of maximum, and the minimum date of maximum since 2002 is 15th Feb (2015), 2nd earliest 28 Feb (2016).
I think we may look back at the explosion of Storm Ciara/Dennis as being a key point in the year.
I think we may look back at the explosion of Storm Ciara/Dennis as being a key point in the year.
As my alter ego has just pointed out over on Twitter (https://twitter.com/GreatWhiteCon/status/1228656494951960578):
In due course the "phenomenal winter warmth" from Storm Dennis will reach the North Pole:
I think we may look back at the explosion of Storm Ciara/Dennis as being a key point in the year.
As my alter ego has just pointed out over on Twitter (https://twitter.com/GreatWhiteCon/status/1228656494951960578):
In due course the "phenomenal winter warmth" from Storm Dennis will reach the North Pole:
I think we may look back at the explosion of Storm Ciara/Dennis as being a key point in the year.
As my alter ego has just pointed out over on Twitter (https://twitter.com/GreatWhiteCon/status/1228656494951960578):
In due course the "phenomenal winter warmth" from Storm Dennis will reach the North Pole:
Warmth has been intruding into the Arctic from western Russia for much of the winter. My guess is the Chukchi, Laptev and Kara Seas are going to have a bad melt season.
A rapidly intensifying low pressure system made its way into the Atlantic on Tuesday, 11 February 2020 and quickly grew into a powerful extratropical cyclone producing hurricane force winds by Thursday, 13 February 2020. By 0600 UTC on 14 February 2020, the low bottomed out with a minimum low pressure of 929mb. This system deepened by more than 40 mb in 24 hours during its rapid intensification phase, classifying it as a “bomb” cyclone. It tracked north towards Iceland where it caused hurricane force wind gusts, the highest gust, although terrain enhanced, reached 159 mph (https://www.severe-weather.eu/recent-events/near-record-wind-gusts-255kmh-hafnarfjall-iceland-mk/). These gusts were recorded on the leading edge of the cyclone where the cold conveyor belt north of the occluded front in the N-NE quadrants played a role.
North Atlantic Storminess – February 13-15, 2020
Jim - Are you calling it the maximum extent already? Yes or No - Or are you "kind of" in case it does happen and you can say you told us so?
I'm teasing a subset of Judith Curry's denizens.
Here's the latest update of "Snow White's" novel "near real time" Arctic sea ice volume (https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2969.0.html) metric:
http://GreatWhiteCon.info/2020/01/wheres-the-thickest-arctic-sea-ice-gone/#Feb-16
Please note that there is a known problem with the NRT data from January 31st onwards.
Wow! Just wow! Given that volume is the most important metric when measuring the long term health of arctic ice, this chart is scary.
[ADS NIPR VISHOP (JAXA)] Arctic Sea Ice Extent.Less running commentary ;)
February 20th, 2020:
14,099,241 km2, a century increase of 114,662 km2. :o
Source: https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/#/extent (https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/#/extent)
New maximum extent.
Why does sea ice volume reach a maximum 6 weeks after sea ice extent ?
We report on results of a systematic inter-comparison of 10 global sea-ice concentration (SIC) data products at 12.5 to 50.0 km grid resolution from satellite passive microwave (PMW) observations for the Arctic during summer. The products are compared against SIC and net ice-surface fraction (ISF) – SIC minus the per-grid cell melt-pond fraction (MPF) on sea ice – as derived from MODerate resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) satellite observations and observed from ice-going vessels.
...My bold. I said it a while ago about "no snow cover during late winter triggers massive albedo feedback", meaning by this significant insolation in February, March and April hitting dark Earth surface instead of white snow. Which brings in - as it stands right now - truly massive extra heat into the system where and when this heat is not supposed to be. Above posted temperature anomalies for large area south of Scandinavia and large parts of Siberia - are mind-boggling to me.
Northern hemisphere snow distribution is uneven - modest positive anomalies across parts of Siberia and N. America, but significant regions at high latitude in Europe that are currently snow-free with daily increasing heat.
...
My bold. I said it a while ago about "no snow cover during late winter triggers massive albedo feedback", meaning by this significant insolation in February, March and April hitting dark Earth surface instead of white snow. Which brings in - as it stands right now - truly massive extra heat into the system ...
hi.
I live on 60N in Scandinavia and this has been the 'new normal' winter for a decade at least. Our winters are getting much shorter as a result.
But there is no punch at all in the sun at these latitudes in Feb., and March. It's not gonna bring in "massive extra heat" as you write. In April insolation is strong, but by then snow is mostly gone anyway.
hi.
I live on 60N in Scandinavia and this has been the 'new normal' winter for a decade at least. Our winters are getting much shorter as a result.
<snip>
A few remarks:
- you may not feel the punch in cold air-masses and the frequent inversions where the air at ground level and close to it is colder than at some higher altitudes.
- nevertheless the energy that can be measured, even at low sun-angles IS SIGNIFICANT.
. In fact, compared to zero it's even huge while not TOP-Level of course.
- Said energy, meeting darker surfaces, makes a "HUGE" difference. Not only in absorbing
. energy but also by quicker melting of the remaining and/or existing snow cover.
<snip>
I foresee highly unusual melting season as a result. In particular, i expect great number of strong cyclones entering the Arctic and some, possibly, forming in it much earlier and stronger than ever before.
Thanks for your input.
F.Tnioli made a pretty bold statement:QuoteI foresee highly unusual melting season as a result. In particular, i expect great number of strong cyclones entering the Arctic and some, possibly, forming in it much earlier and stronger than ever before.
I don't see the link between a very gradual loss of albedo over land in the early months of the year when insolation is very weak, to the formation of a "great number of strong cyclones".
The Arctic sea ice has had a good year so far compared to the decadal average.
I hypothesize we will have an average melting season without much drama.
Another way of looking at it is to think about melt rate at the peak of the season. The difference between 2012 and pretty much every year starting with 2016 is 7-10 days of peak melt. That's the razor's edge we are on.I fear a single year's variation in emissions really won't seriously affect any given melt season.
Interesting point. This year might be a good test with all the extras we get via the pandemic. There was already going to be a change in shipping emissions and that signal got extra strong with reduced shipping and there are lots of other knock on effects on the way.
^^
Local short-term warming, so not directly affecting the Arctic I think.
"ice north of Greenland" With persistent lows over Barents the tidally enhanced flow into the arctic would increase, some water has to leave, i guess the shear zone is quite shallow and everthing above it is moving towards Fram, hence the unusual size of the area on the move. The more or less persistent high[mslp] on the Beaufort side would add to the impetus. It's hard to establish any current but once established a 'slime effect' come into play and until some other random event disturbs the flow it'll persist. If Wayne at eh2r is right we may be stuck with this weather pattern for some time, so the loss of ice may begin to define the season.
I would say that the early birds are those predicting an ice-free Arctic prior to 2030
I would say that the early birds are those predicting an ice-free Arctic prior to 2030
I surreptitiously recorded that question being posed at The Economist's 2013 Arctic Summit in Oslo. Of course the assorted learned speakers might have revised their opinions since then? However have a listen:
https://soundcloud.com/water-connects-us/ice-free-summer-arctic-numbers
Last week ARCUS held a webinar on my favourite topic. “Ocean Waves in the New Arctic”, presented by Jim Thomson from the University of Washington.
Oops...That's Good News, actually.
De voorbije weerkundige winter (december, januari en februari) had een algemene gemiddelde temperatuur van ongeveer 6,3 graden. Na 2007 en 2016 wordt het daarmee de op twee na warmste winter in bijna twee eeuwen, sinds het begin van de waarnemingen in Ukkel in 1833. In 2007 bedroeg de gemiddelde temperatuur 6,6 graden Celsius, 3 graden boven de normaalwaarde.
https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2020/02/25/de-winters-in-belgie/
...Right. I can also add (5) to the list: less snow cover "buffer" to resist melting season start.
I think to put it in context Hefaistos, you need to think not necessarily about what's happening now, but where conditions will be in 3-4 weeks.
What is happening is setup, much like how much running room you have leading up to a broad jump. By losing snow this early, and picking up what are modest but still significant amounts of solar energy means that considerably more energy will
(1) ... be captured directly at Arctic latitudes
(2) ... be available early in the melt season
(3) ... not be required for/buffered by local phase change (e.g. melting snow locally)
(4) ... indirectly permit more transport of heat to the Arctic from lower latitudes. (primarily via
increased moisture)
...
That's why lots of bare ground at high latitudes is concerning, even before the equinox.
...Right. I can also add (5) to the list: less snow cover "buffer" to resist melting season start.
I think to put it in context Hefaistos, you need to think not necessarily about what's happening now, but where conditions will be in 3-4 weeks.
<snip>
<snip>
There certainly are some situations in Arctic and next to it when further increase of temperatures is slowed / halted by some strong negative feedbacks, but "little / no snow late winter and early spring" is one opposite case; positive feedbacks seem to strongly prevail.
I took a look at Bremen, picture attached for 20200301. I looked at the previous years. Never have we ever had so much "red" and "yellow" in the Kara-Laptev region. The ice there is likely very fractured and thin and will go poof extremely quickly come May...
I took a look at Bremen, picture attached for 20200301. I looked at the previous years. Never have we ever had so much "red" and "yellow" in the Kara-Laptev region. The ice there is likely very fractured and thin and will go poof extremely quickly come May...
From a preservation of sea ice in the Arctic Basin point of view, I would much prefer to have thicker/more extensive ice in the Kara/Laptev than in the Bering. This is not good at all.
I'm curious... When you have the ice pack cracked up and smashed together like it is now, don't a lot of the ice slabs stick out deep underneath the ice pack? And would that cause that ice to melt out quickly with bottom melt?
It's cold north of 80 latitude but warmer than average in the lower latitudes. Not a good pattern for the sea ice because the Fram export is high and the thick ice will leave anyway but the land snow is starting to melt more quicklyI think that's the farthest below normal the 80N DMI graph has been in nearly 5 years.
Since a great deal of their mass lies underwater, some hummocks are 20 to 30 metres thickWow! That's like little icebergs, something we discussed here last summer.
A strong 963 hPa cyclone is going to set up in several days. Huge polynyas could be open in the Laptev sea and ESSThe ice is getting banged up at the frontend of what will probably become a serious melt season. Not looking good for the ice this year!
One more day and I think we should start the melting season thread
It has taken a lot of time and energy, successes and failures to build a library of spreadsheets and data sources. So it is a bit annoying to think people have to wade through a load of clutter to reach the data.
This is a data thread. So, please please please bring data or a new way of looking at the data (when discussion is great).
If not, bugger off.
I was just about to post the same thing. Not looking good there in the Bering strait. It's gonna get its pipes cleaned. Look at all the energy that's entering the arctic.
https://earth.nullschool.net/#2020/03/13/0300Z/wind/surface/level/overlay=total_precipitable_water/orthographic=-44.82,94.80,1323/loc=-168.957,66.088
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and call peak ice. Just look at these storms that'll be hitting both sides of the ice pack in a few days from now. Surely that'll make an end to the ice growth, no?You may well be right, but I'm not quite ready to call it.
https://earth.nullschool.net/#2020/03/13/1200Z/wind/surface/level/orthographic=-45.02,91.24,1746/loc=-130.573,74.542
The weather is suggestive, but clouds will both help and harm at the same time. At higher latitudes it will keep heat in. At lower, it will keep burgeoning sun out. Outcomes will also be affected by the payload - how much moisture is transported along with it's latent heat, to where.I agree, but I don't think the temperature really matters. I'm talking about ice destruction and stacking because of wind. The question will be if it's still cold enough to refreeze all that open water that these storms will create.
[ADS NIPR VISHOP (JAXA)] Arctic Sea Ice Extent.
March 9th, 2020:
14,296,768 km2, an increase of 15,184 km2.
2020 is 10th lowest on record.
In the graph are the today's 16 lowest years.
Highlighted the 4 years with September lowest min (2012, 2019, 2016, 2007) & 2020.
Source: https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/#/extent (https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/#/extent)
If i interpret the weather correctly, the Fram export could be rampant in the upcoming days.The melting is strong in this one...
I guess the question at the moment is if the Atlantic water is warm enough to melt the export away quickly enough. If not, a big increase can still happen.
The melting is strong in this one...
I haven't made one of these in a long time
The problem is that it's 48 frames. It's a lot of information. The best way to do this is really to make those videos again, and then upload them to Youtube or somewhere else. The problem with Youtube is that uploading it there completely destroys the quality. So I need to find a better way to do this. Maybe I'll just upload the file into a folder and then share the file.I haven't made one of these in a long time
Just a tip, Freegrass: If you scale it down first and then optimize, you'll likely get a smaller file size than if you do it the other way around. If you already knew, just ignore me. ;)
VISHOP is back up.
Loss of -4400 km^2 on March 10th.
Loss of -5667 km^2 on March 11th.
Current extent 14,286,701 km^2.
Here are some graphs telling me the max might not be in yet.
Has anyone notices that there is a large "valley" in the Fram strait in the DMI thickness map? If that's accurate then the ice near the pole could be unusually weak this year.That looks so scary... Think away all the blue, and what we lost last year, and there won't be much ice left... There's also no "arm" of thick ice protecting the CAP in the Chukchi sea, so the inflow of hot pacific water will penetrate deep into the CAP this year.
The only unknown this year is the impact of lower CO2 emissions because of the crisis. But that'll probably be insignificant ...
It is worth noting that sun-dimming aerosols being removed from the atmosphere will likely cause a temperature increase before we see any significant cooling caused by the lowered CO2.I completely forgot about that. That is so true! And not only that, 9-11 showed that less air travel also increases the temperature.
Do we dare to say BOE?
This winter was already like 2006/7, so I had thought that things would get serious during summer. Then I saw the state of the ice from the Laptev to the Kara. Then came global aerosol collapse.I don’t think the BOE bullet will hit, but I think it will come much closer this year.
Arctic Ice probably needs a miracle to avoid the bullet this year
A semi-sudden world-wide temperature increase of 1 degrees because of lower aerosols would surprise me, but that would probably do weird things with weather if it is for several months.
A 1°C increase in global temperatures would be an increase in the arctic of around 3°C? In some very sick way, I do hope it happens this year. The world needs a good scare it seems before they wake up. Hopefully the world will come together now to fight the virus, and stay together to fight climate change. If we do go above 2°C, that should be scary enough. But I doubt that this will happen.A semi-sudden world-wide temperature increase of 1 degrees because of lower aerosols would surprise me, but that would probably do weird things with weather if it is for several months.
That would pull us over the 2oC threshold.
If Corona keeps going on as it does now, i'd see a huge economic slow-down coming months, especially in production facilities (too much people sick, no work@home options) and air-travel (travel restrictions to prevent spreading). Thus much lower aerosols, much higher temperatures during melt season. A semi-sudden world-wide temperature increase of 1 degrees because of lower aerosols would surprise me, but that would probably do weird things with weather if it is for several months. And we need an extraordinary melting season for blue ocean. We have the ingredients this year that could trigger such a season. But I'd say chances are still low for that to happen.
~The lower in altitude Polar Vortex area right above surface of Earth is warming fast
~ Even compared to 2016, El-Nino driven warmest year in history
~It is unquestionably clear, warming at the core of the vortex is from over all thinner sea ice
Attached is a graph of the JAXA Arctic Sea Ice Monthly Averages since 1979 and the deviations from the linear trend.Do we dare to say BOE?
I'm going to go out on a limb and say no. A BOE would require extent to be ~4Msqkm below the new normal come September, which I don't see happening even if we have a brutal melt season. Variability caused by weather is usually on the order of <1Msqkm.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say no. A BOE would require extent to be ~4Msqkm below the new normal come September, which I don't see happening even if we have a brutal melt season. Variability caused by weather is usually on the order of <1Msqkm.Attached is a graph of the JAXA Arctic Sea Ice Monthly Averages since 1979 and the deviations from the linear trend.
You will see that the maximum -ve departure from the trend was in 2012 at just over 1.5 million KM2. 2nd was 2007 with an anomaly of -1.2 million km2.
Isn't volume the big problem Gerontocrat? What I see on that ice thickness image is a lot of thin ice. So isn't it possible that the ice is so thin now, that we could see a big collapse in area?
<snip>
A gap has opened up in the Chukchi sea.
https://go.nasa.gov/2vi6iEQ
<snip>
I think the opposite will occur. During the last recession, the decrease in travel and consumption resulted in CO2 emissions falling 11%. While some claim that the flattening of the temperature curve during this timeframe was just noise in the data, the timing corresponds with the global recession, and the sharp increase thereafter with the global expansion.
https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms8714
A fall in CO2 emissions merely reduces the rate of increase in atmospheric CO2 ppm.<snip>Even if CO2 emissions fall, CO2 ppm in the atmosphere will increase, but by less.
I think the opposite will occur. During the last recession, the decrease in travel and consumption resulted in CO2 emissions falling 11%. While some claim that the flattening of the temperature curve during this timeframe was just noise in the data, the timing corresponds with the global recession, and the sharp increase thereafter with the global expansion.
https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms8714
Add to that the real possibility that parts of the land and ocean carbon sinks are failing, so less CO2 emissions at least partially offset by lower CO2 sequesteration.
Disagree.
CO2 emmissions falling wouldn't cause that kind of pause. You still have approximately the same CO2 concentration, and small twitches of a few PPM aren't going to trigger dramatic year over year variations in climate. The differences in forcing are too small.
It would have to be something else, quite probably unrelated to the change in fossil fuel consumption. I think the first place I would look would be ENSO, and after that, precipitation patterns.
This article (https://www.hi.no/hi/nyheter/2020/januar/barentshavet-har-blitt-kjoligere-det-flytter-iskantsonen-lengre-sor) states that the Barents Sea has become coolerAn interesting article, do you think it refers to surface temperature or an average over depth? It says temperatures but not which.
It's a bit too cloudy to tell but there doesn't appear to be much sign of refreeze yet on the open leads east of Wrangel Island.
Chukchi Sea, https://go.nasa.gov/3aMQDfY (contrast),mar14, uni-hamburg amsr2-uhh, feb13 inset.
click for full resolution
Speaking of melting, the 2020 melting season thread is open BTW.
Shouldn't we all switch there now?
Link >> https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,3017.0.html
So between 50 and 100 m and up i guess.
I was immediately thinking about the slowdown of the AMOC as well. Could it also be that the meltwater from Greenland is cooling the Atlantic water down that's flowing into the Greenland and Barents sea?
So between 50 and 100 m and up i guess.
The article didnt say at what depth but I'd agree with you Kassy that it is an average of depths between 50m and 200m.
I'm not a big fan of answers like "natural variabilty".
I expect the current very positive AO is working to keep the sea surface temperatures cool but would this be seen at 50m to 200m depth ?
Then there is the AMOC. Is this an indication of a weakened AMOC and transport of Atlantic water at these high lattitudes ?
Another possibility is this a response to shifting and melting of pack ice towards the Atlantic side. So much ice melted out especially in the summer of 2016. Maybe this left a legacy at depth and started this recent downward trend?
Accepting that the max is over, according to the NSIDC extent trailing 5 day mean data, the max of 15.05 million km2 was reached on March 5th.I called it on March 9. Not too bad for an amateur like me... ;D
Interesting that 2012 was not in the 10 lowest maxes and then produced the lowest minimum !