Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Lou

Pages: [1]
1
Antarctica / Re: Pine Island Glacier (PIG) Calving and Discussion
« on: December 02, 2020, 07:16:37 AM »
I'm mostly a longtime lurker here, but I must say the detailed analysis here is greatly helping my understanding of the dynamic forces at play.  It is apparent to me that as the main PIG has retreated, there is therefore less lateral or constraining forces on the adjacent ice sheets.   The lack of constraint combined with the difference in flow speed between adjacent ice streams is now causing them to  tear each other apart, thereby compounding the whole issue.  I'm sure this was obvious to others, but the clarity provided in the recent animations in how these mechanisms are working is fascinating, and somewhat terrifying.  Thank you everyone for the good work and intelligent conversation in here.   

2
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: September 11, 2020, 06:06:22 PM »
The Polarstern from above on "Sunday morning", via the MOSAiC Twitter feed:

https://twitter.com/MOSAiCArctic/status/1304440835119906817

3
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: September 04, 2020, 09:24:13 PM »
NSIDC Daily extent below 4 000 000 km^2! Yay!

Another century drop of 112 and only 599 away from the 2012 minimum.
<snippage>
I wouldn't say "Yay!" though.
I'll forgive the "Yay!".

It has nothing to do with the ice.

It's the excitement and satisfaction of people, who've been denied credibility for years when speaking to the climate catastrophe we face, seeing tangible validation of what they've been screaming about for decades.

I can assure you, and I think I speak for many here, it is a very grim satisfaction.

4
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: August 30, 2020, 03:34:51 PM »
<snip>
That retreat north of Severnaya Zemlya is really spectacular, wow. And it's not over yet. Today and tomorrow there's a peak pressure gradient of 42 hPa, but according to ECMWF it will be 44 hPa at 120 hrs. The direction of the winds will shift a bit, but overall the ice pack should continue to get pushed towards the Pole.

This could easily become the highlight of this melting season! In many ways it's worse than 2012. And no GAC.
      My vote for MVP of the 2020 melt season is the degradation of the CAA-Greenland-NP triangle.  What used to be the stronghold of MYI has been (almost) reduced to a rubble field.  Capped off by the Polarstern photos at the North Pole.  They went to see Santa Claus and (almost) nobody was home.  This has consequences.
      Another sentimental vote for that plucky ice hugging Severnaya Zemlya that refuses to die despite being bathed in warm water for weeks on end.  Will it survive the rest of melt season?

5
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: August 28, 2020, 12:49:14 PM »
Could be an early minimum.

It is unlikely, never any lows in August.

https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,3183.0.html

Quote
NSIDC extent minimum


6
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: August 23, 2020, 02:07:20 PM »
A tad off subject, but I would like to give credit to Oren, for his handling of the Moderator position during this melt season. I am sure at times he may have felt that Neven handed him a stick of dynamite. At times the comments this season have been fair contentious, but I think Oren has reigned with the required fairness and discipline.

Thank you Oren.

7
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: August 08, 2020, 02:51:09 PM »
I'm no expert but it seems regardless of whether or not 2020 is 1st, 2nd, or 3rd it will be the year that is known for setting up the arctic to go poof.  Even if the Beaufort somehow hangs on it is only because of the massive export to it throughout the season.  It does look like it will go though.

The crack (which spurred me to finally sign up for an account here in 2015) has gotten bigger than ever and the bastion of MYI (CAA) is becoming open water and rubble almost to the pole.  Some previous years like 2015 show similar massive damage North of Greenland but 2020 seems more comprehensive.

It reminds me of 2007 in the way that caused such lasting damage.  I don't know where to find weather from 2007 but it did have some big losses in late August and early September.  It would be interesting to compare the 2007 weather with this years.

Just my thoughts.

8
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: August 08, 2020, 04:07:47 AM »

No chance


That is a bold statement to make when the ice looks like it does, and we still have over month to go in the melting season. 

Quote
I never understood why posters get excited about lower latitude, easier to melt sea ice, melting out. <Deleted this part, a strawman indeed. O>

That is a straw man argument that belittles and mischaracterizes the valuable contributions from the legitimate members of this forum.

As always, thank you for your contributions dude 🤟🏻 Tell your friends at WUWT we said hi 😝. 

9
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: July 28, 2020, 09:42:40 AM »
Can't quite understand the comments from wdmn and off the grid.
Simply reported on an updated report from a reputable source
Thought readers might be interested in their findings.
Melting fever affects many commentors at this time of year, and particularly when things are looking bad for the ice. One of the symptoms is a curious intolerance of discordant views.

10
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: July 21, 2020, 11:13:41 PM »
It's looking like we're very likely to see a new record minimum this Sept.  I'm not imagining a BOE this year but some of these 'worst case' extrapolations look close enough to put us very close to one or another of the tipping points mentioned here.  The more I look at what's happening now the more worried I get about next summer.  There's going to be record amounts vulnerable of FYI.

The thing that frightens me is that in a complex system like this, as you approach boundaries, you might expect to see new interactions and non linear effects.  No extrapolation would capture those.

If viewing terror was a measure of the state of the ice I would say this year is worse than any other.  I have always watched with fear and excitement but this is different.

11
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: July 21, 2020, 04:56:13 AM »
Seems like this might be important...
And this also from Zach Labe.  Just another way of seeing things...
What is interesting to me is that this wide a separation between extent and previous years in July is unique - it has gotten to a full five plus day lead on any other year and even in previous anomalous years in the 2010s that just hasn't happened in July.

This is not just an outlier year - it is basically doubling the differential of any of the other years.

12
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2020 Sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 17, 2020, 07:43:22 PM »
Gerontocrat,
thank you very much for the tables and graphs. What would ASIF look like without your (and Juan's) precise and regular information?

13
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: August 12, 2019, 01:11:13 AM »
I am amazed how easily the human is deceived and can "see" patterns with minimal data....
I am amazed how slow machines are in learning the most basic patterns a human can see.

14
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: August 12, 2019, 12:22:14 AM »
Probably a Baby Boomer too.
I apologise deeply on behalf of my mother for her carelessness in giving birth to a baby boomer.
I am taking myself to a dark corner to weep and wallow in my misfortune. Woe is me.
"He was despised, rejected of men, a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief" (Isaiah 53:3)

I guess this is off-topic but.....


15
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: August 11, 2019, 12:42:55 PM »
Any thoughts on why these two are so similar, or on what, if anything, it tells us about the rest of the season?

Really unexpected.

Same for Charctic, by the way.

Same reason for this one, I think.

16
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: July 31, 2019, 04:26:28 PM »
I would rather read or scroll by an occasional post about blueberries in Russia, even though we don't need to infer climate or temperatures through plants in this day and age.

However, when each of the blueberries is followed by 8 (and counting) posts arguing whether it's OK to post about blueberries, that becomes the actual problem. I'd say about 90% of the offtopic posts in this thread is people arguing about whether something was offtopic or not, so perhaps let's cut down on that instead and let the occasional blueberry posts be?

17
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: July 29, 2019, 04:43:04 PM »
This post started from the ice-drift map (latest attached) and a stray image in my mind. Wind will have very little traction blowing over a flat 100% concentration ice pack (until it hits a pressure ridge). But on a load of ice rubble?

So in an attempt to do something about my total ignorance I googled and found two papers produced in 2014 from a National Science Foundation project..

https://www.arcus.org/witness-the-arctic/2014/3/article/22794
Arctic Ocean Sea Ice Loss: Modeling the effect on Wind-to-Ocean Momentum Transfer
&
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/2013JC009425%4010.1002/%28ISSN%292169-9291.FAMOS1
Seasonality and long-term trend of Arctic Ocean surface stress in a model

Most of the remarks below are from the first - written so even I could understand (most) of it.
Quote
The momentum flux from the atmosphere into the ocean (also known as ocean surface stress) depends on various factors such as wind speed, surface layer stability, surface roughness, and sea ice conditions. Roughness changes in response to changing ocean surface waves and variations in the geometry of ice floes and ridges. Three regimes characterize how sea ice moderates momentum transfer into the Arctic Ocean:

    1. At very high ice concentrations, near 100%, the pack ice is so compact that it barely responds to the wind forcing and hence also shields the ocean from the wind.

    2. Slightly lower ice concentrations, about 80-90%, allow the ice to drift freely with the wind as pressure within the ice pack is reduced to a minimum, while floe edges and ridges provide high drag (See Figure 1). We refer to this as an "optimal ice concentration", because ocean surface stress is maximal in this case -- as illustrated in the graph of ocean surface stress as a function of sea ice concentration derived from Pan-Arctic Ice Ocean Modeling and Assimilation System1 (PIOMAS) output (See Figure 2).

    3. For still lower ice concentrations, stresses decline because open water—even with surface waves—is generally smoother than pack ice.
graph attached
This suggests to me that when looking at the ice drift map the effect of winds will be highest in the high concentration (but less than 100%) areas


Quote
a shrinking summer sea ice extent means less momentum flux into the ocean in this season. How is that? In the 1980s and 1990s most of the Arctic Ocean featured high ice concentrations, even in summer, with an average close to the 80-90% optimum.

In recent years however, vast areas of open water have reduced the mean ice concentration below this optimum, which results in an overall ocean stress decrease at a small but significant rate in summer.

What does the future hold? The area of high momentum flux (See green in Figure 3a) is shrinking toward Greenland as sea ice continues to retreat. Further, an expanding summer season with increasingly less ice coverage might steepen the negative ocean stress trend and eventually even reverse the positive trends in spring and fall. But this assumes that wind forcing and ocean surface waves do not grow, an assumption that might prove incorrect in a changing climate. This illustrates the fascinating interplay between opposing forces that will determine the magnitude of Arctic Ocean currents in the future.
image attached


The second paper shows show how while in summer ocean stress trend is falling, in spring and especially autumn (period of highest winds is in October) ocean stress is increasing as concentrations in much of the remaining ice have fallen to below 100%.
See last image, and here is their conclusion (edited)
Quote
Our analysis indicates that sea ice in free-drift amplifies the momentum transfer from the atmosphere into the ocean, which contradicts the general perception that sea ice damps the atmosphere-ocean exchange.

On annual average, most momentum is transferred at an ice concentration of 85%.

On the seasonal scale, sea ice conditions are optimal for maximal momentum flux into the ocean twice a year, in spring and fall. However, wind speeds are much higher in fall

What do I take from this?
- when looking at a sea-ice drift / wind speed map, have the Bremen ice concentration map to hand to see where he biggest impact will be on ice mobility (green and purple not good, yellow and red good?,
- October is the month when winds can have the maximum effect on a weakened ice pack (also Spring?),
- the data goes to 2012. Were there follow-up projects?   I hope so.
___________________________________________________________
I think this is relevant to the end of season prognosis.
I await being shot down with interest.

18
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: July 27, 2019, 07:31:26 PM »
philopek, please note that Rich repeatedly ignored good arguments recently in this topic, and continues to do so. For example, in very post you quote, he talks about "over most of the rest of the ice covered areas" despite it was mentioned more than once, recently in this topic, that surface temperatures over existing ice indicate nothing and are always near 0C as long as there is ice, since any extra heat goes to melt the ice before it could go to increase surface temperature.

Several posters tried to tell Rich recently, this and that way, that his posts are far from being appreciated. It just does not work - Rich keeps doing his thing, which at times includes ad hominem-like responses. If you see such, don't let yourself be provoked by it. We just gotta endure presense of this guy, i guess... :)

Most of this is off topic and unnecessary.

You know which portions.

19
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: July 27, 2019, 10:09:53 AM »
I have just returned from Croatia. Thanks to everyone for the condolences. In coming days, I'll try and get things in order here on the Forum.

20
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: July 26, 2019, 05:23:18 PM »

 The M'Clure is terrible. … Banks and Eglinton … Prince of Wales Strait is a sickly gray; barring resupply from Viscount Melville Sound, that channel will be ice-free this summer, … 
Most of us don't know the Canadian Arctic like Ossifrage does.  Two maps on the Arctic Maps thread may assist:

21
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: July 26, 2019, 02:37:49 PM »
Guys,guys!

We know why Neven is away and you want him to come back to this???

Take a chill pill, kiss and make up .and lets move on please?
Yep, i concur with Gray-Wolf 100%. Everyone just calm down for Neven's sake, please!

P.S. If someone missed what it's about - it's extraordinary circumstances currently, for Neven: he's enduring through much stressful, very obligating and major family matter, at this time. This is what keeps him away and very busy, for now. Lots on his shoulders now, as it is - and we can help by at very least staying civilized in the forum here.

22
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: July 26, 2019, 01:58:31 PM »
Guys,guys!

We know why Neven is away and you want him to come back to this???

Take a chill pill, kiss and make up .and lets move on please?

23
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: July 26, 2019, 01:52:20 PM »
Enough with the banter back and forth.

+1

24
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: July 26, 2019, 08:35:41 AM »
I am trying to understand and convey the thickness of the traditional CAB, not the bigger CAB that Wipneus' might be referring to.
Perhaps admitting that you were wrong would have been a better tactic than taking swipes at Wipneus who is one of the extremely few posters here that actually add some real value to the forums.

26
Arctic sea ice / Re: When will the Arctic Go Ice Free?
« on: July 25, 2019, 06:57:47 AM »
Folks, this thread is deteriorating fast and hard.
Sometimes the best answer is to keep mum, and let things sort themselves out. Not every post needs a riposte.
The arctic will go BOE in a decade and a half (this was the subject of this thread, not the consequences BTW) and then we can revisit and see who was right.

27
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: July 25, 2019, 04:43:17 AM »
Both of you cut it out!! Enough with the name calling children.....

28
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: July 25, 2019, 01:14:30 AM »
The dipole has arrived. But it does not come with a lot of heat.

The SST's are very warm around the edges, but in no rush to invade the CAB.

2019 leads in some categories, but area losses are skipping, suggesting lost momentum.

The wind remains impressive, but mostly cold and pointed away from Fram. Some compaction, some dispersion, some export. Nothing record breaking.

The ice is in crap condition, but it won't disappear w/o good reason. Especially from the CAB.
 
I'm rooting for a record and anything else that might occur in the short term that will jolt the world ioward the necessary urgent response to AGW.

Second place doesn't make headlines. That where it looks like we're headed.

29
Arctic sea ice / Re: When will the Arctic Go Ice Free?
« on: July 24, 2019, 08:32:37 AM »
I think a BOE can happen any year now. Not as the new normal but as an outlier like 2012 was. You just need one year with the perfect conditions to align. Poor winter ice formation. Plenty of sun during peak insulation and heavy storms before and after that. I don't think a single BOE will cause the whole system to go into full disaster mode. The following years could easily recover and follow  the normal decline path until BOE's become the normal a decade or so later.

I guess, once BOE are the new norm, the next milestone would be real BOE. Meaning absolutely zero ice in September.

30
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: July 23, 2019, 04:11:10 PM »
So when hyperbole is no longer hyperbolic enough Friv resorts to caps and big fonts... weird flex, but ok. ;)

31
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: July 22, 2019, 03:18:26 AM »
The best path forward is the current path. There is nothing you, me, or anyone else can do about it.
Certainly off topic but why is it that you come here?
It is not my fault if you believe in delusions that are disproven by the ongoing course of human history.

Instead of insulting me and dragging the thread off-topic again why don't you try answering the question of how removing aerosols won't result in a BOE and a crisis magnitudes worse than today's.

1. You dragged it off-topic with your editoralizing.

2. Aerosols are an issue, but you are over-stating it by a good order of magnitude. Effect is smaller than originally thought and far less abrupt.

3. You weren't insulted. What reason do you have to pay attention if humanity is screwed? This suicide cult crap pisses me off. Think as you wish, but it is unethical and immoral to spread a suicidal opinion all over the internet encouraging hopelessness.

4. Your opinion is factually incorrect.

This will be my last on this. If you persist on spouting your suicidal ideations, I will track down that blocking function/app and block your posts and encourage all others to do the same.

I think I overreacted but I also disagree strongly on aerosols and I think research also backs my viewpoint. I will not continue this tangent and I apologize for my previous brusqueness.  :)

32
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: July 22, 2019, 02:46:20 AM »
Let me rephrase: I am not offended by bbr suggesting that such a discussion be moved. Such suggestions are made all the time. Nevertheless I do think the discussion is relevant and directly related to what may be about to happen in the next few weeks. Now we have it on 2 threads lol.

I would just like to help calm down the tone.

33
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: July 22, 2019, 02:31:29 AM »
Let me echo, out of respect for Neven (and everyone): everyone please chill out. Moving discussion of sun vs. storms to another thread is fine and appropriate. Let's keep the heat focussed on the ice, so to speak.

34
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: July 22, 2019, 01:58:26 AM »
Chill out bbr!  You are taking advantage of the fact Neven is not here and being an ass.  I like your weather forecasts, and I think you often have valuable things to add to the discussion, but that does not give you a right to pretend you know everything and insult other members!

This melting season is an important one.  It has been since May.  Let’s see if the long range forecasts verify before we start talking doom and gloom. 

Personally, I have thought for a long time that if the ice in the Beaufort melts we will see a new record.  But, it still has not melted and we are long past peak insulation. 

If the predicted dipole actually happens, it will give us an opportunity to compare against the GAC of 2012. 

No one knows which is more important, because it has never happened in this way before. That is why we watch and compare and see what the outcome is.  Insulting people who have different views than you is not helpful, and it detracts from the good comments that you often make. 

35
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: July 22, 2019, 12:52:12 AM »
Signal to noise ratio is deteriorating on this site. Will be signing off for a while.

36
Great to see all the super replies on the topic about the impact of clear skies in august.

All the knowledge provided only proves how valid and good the question was.

A good day for many user's learning curve, at least for  mine

37
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: July 21, 2019, 09:46:33 PM »
The world is on fire. 2012 vs. 2019. Oh well. The sheer number of fires this year is astounding. Click attached to animate.

Where is this?

Why would a huge high pressure ridge be bad for ice retention? Just because insolation is still high for a few more weeks? But wouldn't it also bring an end to the winds? Wouldn't big storms be worse?
Not to be a b*tch but there is a stupid questions thread for a reason.

https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,143.0.html

Since we're always presented with insolation during high pressure as the main reason for that to be bad for the ice and since the sun-angle where there is still more or less solid ice is already quite flat/low, this was by no means a stupid question.

Some exaggerations here and doomsday-buzzword feeds and sensationalism here are way more stupid IMO.

Last but not least call someone who ASKS a question instead of babbling away stupid is
bad etiquette and the most stupid at the end of the day are those who don't ask.

38
Arctic sea ice / Re: When will the Arctic Go Ice Free?
« on: July 15, 2019, 02:54:47 PM »
Peter,

I disagree on several counts.

The “we” in both cases is a generic we of unassigned humanity looking at the problem.

More than that I reject flatly your assertion that members of this community are “more alarmist”.

“More alarmed” is correct. “Alarmist” as used in English today is a derogatory valuation of the state of alarm. Far from being alarmist, the vast majority of those participating in this forum are stark realists. Alarm in the context you use it is generally a statement about something the writer takes as being a wrong headed and unjustified emotional reaction.

Clearly many of us are having emotional reactions to the terrifying changes we are seeing and to the most likely consequences of those observed changes and trends. That does not make them “alarmist” statements in the pejorative sense that you seem to intend.

I find it more concerning that this sort of language use has become the stock and trade of political and financial interests hell bent on maintaining their rapacious ways without regard to the consequences.

And there’s is in my opinion no place for that in the discussion.

Sam

39
Consequences / Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« on: July 15, 2019, 02:34:36 PM »
A BOE is nothing special. We are already experiencieng BOE of the Barents, BOE of the Bering, etc. As time passes by, we will experience a BOE of the CAB eventually. Since we have already experienced partial/small BOEs, we know exactly what it brings (see pic) in the NH midlatitudes: much warmer winters, especially in Eurasia, due to the weakening of the Siberian High; and warmer summers. That's it. There is nothing mystical about the BOE. And more rain of course, but that is obvious

This is all completely wrong.

40
Arctic sea ice / Re: When will the Arctic Go Ice Free?
« on: July 14, 2019, 06:22:15 PM »
With no disrespect intended toward any scientists involved, I think the IPCC is flawed and intentionally so. As I have said before, it is primarily a political document, constrained by consensus. I'm not sure we can exclude limited scope as a possibility. They continue to ignore reality, i.e. empiricism, because reality has yet to be peer reviewed.

Also, as I understand it, they specifically have not mentioned feedbacks in their reports. The rationale, such as it is, is that the feedbacks can not be adequately characterized, so they are eliminated. One can debate the merits of that approach, but a large gap exists, nonetheless.

This thread contains a wide variety of views, some scientific, some emotional, but deviating from the IPCC is far from blasphemy IMHO. 


41
Arctic sea ice / Re: When will the Arctic Go Ice Free?
« on: July 14, 2019, 06:17:08 PM »
My difficulty with the IPCC report(s) comes from a different place. I cannot challenge the science and methodologies the scientists use. So on what basis can I criticise.

Simply put, because so far in each cycle they have been wrong, and each new IPCC cycle has built into it an unrealistic view of what the world is doing and will do.

Why,
- because the action taken by the world has not reduced CO2 emissions. They have increased.
- because the majority of new papers with new and improved data say things are worse.
- because the IPCC mandate is to look towards 2100.
- because ......

The proof is that the UN felt it necessary to issue the report to say to the world - you've got 12 years left or you/we are well are truly done for. And look at the reality, CO2 emissions are rising, carbon sinks are being degraded. We don't have 12 years. 2019 is not just a year wasted, it is a year that stole 2 years from that 12 years (if it exists at all).

So when will the Arctic go ice free? Sooner than when the IPCC says.
When will the Arctic return to its previous state? Probably never.

And that is all I am going to say about that.
Back to looking at data.

42
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: July 14, 2019, 11:32:33 AM »
Looking at the most current bremen amsr2 map, a few things stand out.
The ess is steadily “darkening” (losing concentration) and retreating, which will continue to provide sustained area losses for a while. The laptev bite is still widening towards the ess (helping its deeper collapse within less than 10 days?) and is crucially starting to also get bigger in the 80 north, possibly starting the race to the north pole that some here have predicted.
There is another torching of the greenland sea ice which might also contribute to losses if either the export stop or the cab can t sustain it anymore without showing visible signs of dispersion. Although expected, it is necessary to poin it out given the imminent loss of a few hundreds square kilometers there.
The more siberian side for the chuchki is headed for collapse with large patches of water visible, after a few days of preconditionning and lower retreat, it will soon fully eat onto the ess, precipitating collapse there in a domino effect.
The beaufort is looking rather poorly, not only because of the extending holes inside it, but also because the instabilities (read open water areas) that its dispersion created deep inside the pack are spreading towards the chuchki whose alaskan bite has now breached the 75 north parallel.
All in all, the pacific side looks pretty bad and worsening with each new amsr2. On the other hand, it looks like I was wrong about the cab/ kara blob, it will still remain for a while longer, but atlantification has started between svalbard and fjl islands, directly affecting the cab.
In other news, the Hudson is finally giving out, with very low concentration almost throughout, and despite some attack on the channels from the baffin, the caa looks to be little affected by melt, especially on the western side, maybe somewhat replenished by drifting floes from the beaufort?
So to conclude, pacification is getting worse and i think we will have the same result there as with the 2012 gac, but with no gac. Atlantification is also starting proper, but we have yet to see if it will be a decisive force this melting season. The cab is starting to get attacked in multiple sides, so the only real respite we have now is really only the western caa, but for how long

43
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: June 27, 2019, 04:39:16 PM »
The GAC welled up heat stored in layers below the Arctic ocean's surface to melt large quantities of ice. Of course, it takes heat to melt ice. Yes, melting ice is a highly endothermic process. The comment you referred to was incorrect and should be disregarded.

Water is a very unusual liquid, it's extraordinarily strongly hydrogen bonded. It's a liquid at room temperature whereas most other compounds with a similar atomic weight are gaseous. When it freezes it forms covalent bonds, and it expands, and hence it's density goes down. Forming those bonds releases energy. When you break those bonds, you have to add energy. The same applies to the transition from liquid to gas, but this time you have to break all the hydrogen bonds that keep it as a  liquid, and that requires much more energy than the transition from solid to liquid.

I'd recommend reading the wiki on water and ice. There are whole journals dedicated to the research of water. Its fascinating stuff....well, I assume, to the other nerds on this forum....


44
Arctic sea ice / Re: Arctic Image of the Day
« on: June 06, 2019, 06:24:23 AM »

empty shells filling the void with valuable assets

+1 my thoughts since days and all this bullshit for bragging rights and a few selfies.  :-\ :-\ :-\

I refrained from commenting until now, but our national broadcaster presented (for far too long) the story of one person that complaining that he nearly lost his life due to the line ups. It was prompted by the fact that "so many"people had been dying on Everest lately. Where the helll are our priorities, have we lost our collective minds?

He never realized that he *was* the line-up, but somehow thought he was "special". He was portrayed as heroic, rather than what he really was, entitled and self-indulgent.

I have decided that the "mountain climbing adventurer" epitomizes why we are so royally screwed. Selfish, narcissistic individuals, caring only for themselves, are engaging in a pointless exercise and in the process, leaving their shit behind, both literally and figuratively.

I take faint comfort in that the majority of the commenters about the above article were having none of it, many in harsh but valid terms.

Cue Pogo quote here.

</rant>

45
opted for 3.25 - 3.75 because i believe that we're getting close to 2012 even without the then main drivers to minimum, simply because the starting point is much lower in all parameters, extent, area as well as thickness/volume

as we all know a cold july can postpone that again but sooner or later we won't dodge that cannonball anymore.

46
Science / Re: 2019 CO2 emissions
« on: April 11, 2019, 06:05:14 PM »
Perhaps look in "2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels"?

Atmospheric levels represent the actions of all sources (natural and anthropogenic) and sinks, and there is a significant amount of natural variation (e.g. La Nina/El Nino). There is also the possibility of feedbacks increasing natural emissions and reducing sinks. So probably not a good link between the two, especially in the short-term.

Coal Usage
Maybe the best proxy is coal usage in China and India, as the increase in coal usage accounted for 70% of the rise in emissions in 2017 and 2018. Forecasts are for 4% growth in India coal usage ongoing and it looks like China is quietly building new coal-fired power stations, so they may not peak for quite a while. Coal consumption statistics are usually quite delayed in reporting though. I ignore any reduction due to increased natural gas usage, as the significantly underreported fugitive methane leaks make it as bad as coal (yes, that means that emissions grew by more than reported in 2018).

Wind and Solar Electricity Generation
Another could be the forecast for the increase in wind and solar electricity generation (not capacity addition which is very misleading due to differing capacity factors) versus the forecast increase in overall electricity generation (growing at about 2.5% per year). If the ratio is greater than 1 (currently less than 0.5) electricity generation is decarbonizing. I ignore hydroelectricity (growth limited and net up-front emissions due to construction and the flooding of vegetation) and the highly questionable bio-fuels (e.g. wood pellets may be just as bad as coal and therefore UK emissions probably did not fall by as much as claimed).

In 2017 humanity utilized approximately 22,000 Terawatt hours of electricity, wind provided 5% of that, and solar 2% of that. Their combined share grew by 1%, which was much less than the 2.6% growth in overall generation. The growth rate would need to treble to start decarbonizing. You can get the data for look-back IRENA (International Renewable Energy Association) and look-forward data from GWEC (Global Wind Energy Council) and Solar Power Europe. Their forecasts for 2019 (which are usually pretty good) point to slowing growth rates in wind and solar, so not decarbonization. Same to 2022.

Internal Combustion Engine Car Fleet
As long as this is growing (as it is rapidly in China and probably soon India, and slowly in the US and Europe) emissions will tend to increase, offset a little by more efficient engines (offset a lot by increases in the size of cars). In 2019 car sales may fall somewhat, but the overall ICE car fleet will continue to grow. Until EV's are a significant share of sales in the USA and Europe this increase will continue. Monthly sales numbers, and EV share, are published monthly. Still too low to reduce the ICE fleet in the USA and EU.

Sorry that its not that simple to do. I track these things in detail because it is necessary for my PhD, it can be quite a pain tracking down accurate (and not misrepresented) data. My take is that, short of a recession, emissions will increase between now and 2022.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/secret-coal-plants-reveal-chinas-strategy-of-the-green-mirage_2860707.html

https://yearbook.enerdata.net/electricity/electricity-domestic-consumption-data.html

https://yearbook.enerdata.net/renewables/wind-solar-share-electricity-production.html

https://www.irena.org/publications/2019/Mar/Capacity-Statistics-2019

https://gwec.net/global-wind-report-2018/

http://www.solarpowereurope.org/global-market-outlook-2018-2022/

47
I'm with Rod.  I miss the atmosphere here about 3-5 years ago.  Even 2 years ago.  It used to be straight information.  I loved lurking here and learning.  Now there's a high signal-to-noise ratio requiring much sorting and sifting to get to the goods.  I still enjoy lurking here but...  it's more taxing than it once was.

On topic, about 9 years ago when I was just beginning my journey into self-education on weather and climate, Gavin Schmidt came to the university in the city near me to give some kind of talk.  I drove an hour to get there, and during the Q&A at the end I asked him this very question.  At the time I was disappointed by his answer: "Long after we're dead."  Think about the Great Lakes.  Living in Minnesota at the time, I'm only really familiar with Lake Superior, but it freezes at least a little bit every winter and the adjacent land masses see temperatures into the 80s every year and occasionally 90s.  I know there is a difference freshwater versus salt, but even so.  It will be a long time before the Arctic is that warm.  That much polar night surrounded by large continents for cold air masses.  It will get pretty warm in the summer yet and still freeze in the winter.

48
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2018 sea ice area and extent data
« on: August 11, 2018, 10:30:59 AM »
JAXA ARCTIC EXTENT 5,666,808 km2(August 10, 2018)

Just to add to Juan's post
- Extent loss of 78 k is above the average for this date by about 5k,
- Extent is now 73 k km2  (1.3 %) below the 2010's average extent on this date,
- and 131 k (2.3%) above 2017 (which started a series of below average extent losses at this time) ,
- Extent loss to date is now 300 km2 (3.5 %) below the 2008-2017 average, with 85.6 % of the average melting season done.

Resulting minimum from average remaining melt is  4.23 million km2, (excluding 2012 from the average gives 4.26 million km2 - a reducing and insignificant difference). Range of results from last ten years remaining melt is 3.90 to 4.60 million km2 - also a narrowing range. For a minimum at 2nd lowest remaining melt needs to be about 11% above average. For a new record low remaining melt would need to be 2.49 million km2 as opposed to the average remaining melt of 1.44 million km2, i.e 1.05 million (73 %) above the average. Not feasible.

Of interest (?) is that in 2012 melt from this point was just 0.33 million (23%) above the average.
That 2017 feeling diminishes- even though extent losses are only slowly catching up on the slow melt to date and NSIDC Area losses have slowed significantly. There is, on average, just 14.4% (33 days) of further extent loss to go. Could the melting season last a bit longer than that - Yes.  On the other hand, could extent loss sharply reduce? Yes.

As a result of these persistent higher than average extent loss, a September minimum in the range of 4.00 to 4.50 million km2 seems probable, and perhaps even another bin lower (3.75 to 4.25) looks possible. But that is still possibly 0.2 million km2 above 2nd place and about 0.8 million km2 above the 2012 outlier.

ps: Sept minimum vote. A browse through the melting season thread suggests a warmer few days to come than last year. On the other hand compaction in the Central Arctic is high which might slow melting. My vote must be cast, oh dear.

49
I don't know when the CAB will be ice-free in Winter.  I just think it will happen suddenly, and at about the same time it is ice-free in Summer.  The areas close to the continents are going to probably take longer.

I do think that any claim to knowing when is pure bullshit.
I agree with your first statement, but most certainly don't agree with the second. Every arctic location that has transitioned from perennial ice cover to being seasonally ice free has followed a pattern - from the first "BOE" it takes a decade or more to achieve a reliable annual BOE, then over time the ice-free season grows longer - melt-out arrives earlier and refreeze arrives later. This process takes time as well. And only parts of locations that are fed by a warm neighboring ocean such as the Barents (including parts of adjacent CAB) and the Bering are transitioning to a perennial ice-free state. These processes take decades. So I can't know when the CAB becomes ice-free in winter, but I can most certainly know that it will not happen when it first becomes ice-free in summer, but at least several decades after that event, most probably several centuries due to the size of the CAB and the shortness of the current melting season in the CAB compared to the freezing season.

50
Predicting on extent or area is misleading. They are 2D measures and exclude the vital third dimension - thickness. The thickness is failing far faster than the areal measures.

Extent in particular is most misleading. It counts any area with 15% ice as all ice. As the ice cap breaks apart from thinning and losing integrity, it is shattering and spreading out. This is especially apparent over the last decade. This falsely makes the extent appear far larger than it really is.

Based on the thinning (volume), the Arctic will be ice free in September in about 2022-2023 plus or minus about two years. And yes, if we have an El Niño next year or the year after it could be that soon.

Based on those same trends, without any additional feedback from the blackwater event of a warming ice free ocean, naively projecting the ice volume declines forward, the Arctic will be ice free about 2053, plus or minus a couple of years. With even a small nudge of positive feedback that is 2050.

But let's not be naive shall we? The black water event (ice free periods, expanding each year) will have profound impacts on the energy storage in the ocean and the delay in succeeding years refreeze. That may pull forward the first ice free Arctic winter to circa 2035.

But then too, as the ocean over the Arctic plain warms, more methane clathrate will undoubtedly 'break' releasing yet more methane. Already we have massive streams of methane being released. When those are rapid enough. The decline in ocean density in the region above the clathrate will fall due to the increasing gas content in the water. At some point, that crosses a threshold. The decreased pressure on the sea floor then leads to a runaway methane release over some region of unknown size that then completely releases its clathrates as gas in a giant 'boil'.

We have seen this happen in the Gulf of Mexico from oil drilling, and from subsea slides. The areal extent of these is limited there. They may not be so limited on the Arctic plain. Gigatons of methane may release all at once over a very short period.

In the gulf, these 'boiling' events are quite likely the cause of ships sinking, planes lost, ... colloquially called the Bermuda Triangle.

Whatever the case, even without added methane releases, the black water event will pull forward the first ice free Arctic winter date by perhaps 5-10 years (my guess, and only a guess). That would mean circa 2043-2048. It takes very little added positive feedback to pull that forward further to 2035.

And with the added winter heat, tundra fires in Siberia, rotting of the tundra, collapse of tundra, methane belching from the Yamal peninsula, or a dozen others each of which easily cause that, 2035 is not unreasonable.

What is very certain is that it will occur far before 2,100 and under no possible circumstance in centuries.

We are very close.... very close indeed.

It is very likely that all of us on ASIF will live to see the first ice free Arctic September. And it is even likely that most of us on ASIF will live long enough to see a fully ice free Arctic - barring of course that we do not get killed by the various wars, plagues, famines, droughts, deluges, fires, civil strife, and other calamities that come with such enormous changes in the operation of our biosphere.

Pages: [1]