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 - cascadeshiker

Pages: [1]
1
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: August 09, 2020, 09:33:10 PM »
This remarkable freeze/melt cycle has been unfortunate but perhaps inevitable, putting us literally in uncharted waters with regards to massive climate change impacts.

It’s easy to forget, as the post-BOE forum properly notes, that once upon a time the Barents, Baltic, Bering, Baffin. Chukchi, and Kara hosted millions of sq km of year-round ice. (And that not so long ago, 1000 m thick ice gouged the Lomonosov ridgetop.) On 08 Aug 2020, 38% of the remaining ice (the Arctic Ocean basin, was open water. Vast areas of tundra are free of reflecting snow as well. We’re already well into BOE in most respects.

What’s going on at the moment is baffling, notably between Greenland and the north pole. It’s clear we don’t really understand the current physical state of the ice. Thus even if surface weather were predictable three days out, where things will end up by mid-October still remains up in the air.

However we do have a good grip on some of the pre-conditioning events that have brought the ice to its current state:

-1- The melt season really began in the previous freeze season, even earlier. Vast areas of surprisingly thin 0.3m ice remained in the Laptev when the Polarstern moored on Oct 4th. That and a slow start to freeze-up are documented by thousands of km of ship thickness transects with no graduating SYI floes thick enough to stand on for Mosaic. (T Krumpen http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-2173-2020)

-2- The TransPolar Drift over winter, as accurately imaged in Ascat time series, bore little resemblance to recent years in two key respects: months of very rapid Fram-ward displacement and extensional engagement of ice to the pole and beyond. Often the ice drift is just circumpolar.

-3- The whole icepack does not rotate CW with the TPD but rather participation is demarcated by immense  curvilinear leads, newly visualized in a dockside posting by L Kaleschke and enhanced on the Mosaic forum by directional convolution. These fracture lines, coincidentally or causally, approximately delimit the puzzling openings to the pole above Morris Jesup. A lot of MYI ice between Greenland and the pole was fractured by lead formation.

-4- Missing this year was any significant CW rotational movement of thick ice out of the western CAB. While this ice has never moved further than a half gyre in the last ten years of tracking, commonly a strip of CAB ice moves to inevitable melt in the warmer open seas of the Chukchi (which might be called internal export).

-5- Export out the Fram was robust during the TPD, pushing everything ahead of a 500 km east-west line through the initial position of the PS to oblivion in the Greenland Sea. Behind this line, newly formed Laptev ice filled the growing open water gap to shore. However, since mid-May, export out the Fram, SV-FJL gap, Bering Strait, CAA garlic press and Nares have all been inconsequential (and will remain so, too little time is left).

-6- A record heat wave off Ellesmere in mid July coupled with persistent easterly winds melted vulnerable matrix ice joining floes, enabling churning of offshore ice into residual rubble. The observed movement to the west is not unusual but it was far more narrowly restricted to the CAA coast in past events. The main CAB ice pack, being no longer attached to coastal land or ocean bottom, might be set adrift to elsewhere by persistent winds from the south. We’ve not yet seen that game-changer.

-7- The Pacific-side cyclone centered on July 27th hit like a tornado at 75º/-160º decimating the ice, on Sentinel-1 and WorldView, making clear that error-prone thickness and area/extent whole-ocean numbers don’t capture key issues such as ice mechanical strength, internal pressure or response to stress.

Both the Chukchi and slow-melting Beaufort were pre-conditioned by dispersion for flash lateral and bottom melt after the storm; note insolation today at 75º surprisingly is still 64% the strength the week centered on solstice (4th image below) but has to get through clouds and escape low angle surface reflection.

Are these independent events or somehow consequent to a single master change (such as breakdown trend of equatorial heat gradient as manifested in the jet stream)? Yes to a certain extent but this view has to be distinguished from the slot machine model put forward by Csnavywx in #4662.

That is, the multi-decadal downward trend of ice has created a set-up for which a coincidental confluence of bad weather events over a single freeze/melt cycle sequentially sum to an ice disaster. Even bland weather from here to October may suffice for a seriously below-trend outcome. Regardless of how the season turns out, as @Zlabe notes, fractional BOE has gone on all summer.

The files below expand or animate with a click. File names explain the topic addressed. I thank uniquorn for valuable discussions. Clouds are removed by setting a sequential five day AMR2 stack to 'darken only' in gimp.

2
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: August 03, 2020, 10:19:52 PM »
To all the anti-vax, anti-mask, anti-everything people, this is the logical conclusion of “freedom”.

3
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: July 31, 2020, 06:39:21 PM »
To be honest, 74 is pretty old. But no doubt Cain got the virus at the Trump rally, is this some sort of belated revenge against him for running against el presidente?

Nope, unfortunately it's just some wicked form of karma for downplaying the danger of the virus (or playing with fire).

If there is any form of karmic justice Trump will get it eventually.

4
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: July 31, 2020, 07:12:18 AM »
I just want to make a comment here for no particular reason.
I live in Melbourne, Australia. We are in the middle of an outbreak of Covid 19, and it isn't even something that registers on the global stage.
The initial outbreak early this year was easily controlled through social distancing, isolation and relatively good management.

Everyone thought we did well, and we did. CV19 looked to be something that, for most people, was not a big deal. But for some it meant hospital and ICU and then death.

My take on it is that CV19 is relatively bad in itself, and bad enough to warrant the shut down given we don't know enough to simply ignore it. Most people will be okay. Most people who die from it have pre existing conditions and are old.... but only if the hospital systems are functioning. If that fails, then the game changes somewhat to kill healthier and younger people.

In this second outbreak, one that is not driven from overseas arrivals but community spread that is untraceable, and it isn't even that bad in global sense, my take is this.

In a few weeks we went from 10s per day to 600 plus per day. Our hospitals are full even at those "low" numbers. Most people in hospital with CV19 are very sick, and the ICU wards are almost full. Nurses and doctors are coming down with CV19 in spite of having protective equipment and training and the human resources we have are stretched already. It has made it into aged care facilities now (25% of them are infected now) and that situation is about to become a nightmare very soon.

This has happened in a city with very good health care, good resourcing, well trained staff, a proactive State Govt and supportive Federal Govt. All it has taken to bring our health care system to breaking point is an average 400 cases per day over the last week, but 1300 in the last two days.

Testing has been huge, something like 1.3 million tests for a population of 5 million people.

CV19 is a problem. Sure, it doesn't severely affect most people, but when it does, it does it hard and over a long period of time... and we are only now learning more about the longer term effects it has.

Melbourne is in week 3 of a fairly tight lockdown with mask wearing compulsory and it is looking like we are losing the fight a bit.

The economy is hurting, people are stressed, it is not nice at all.
While I would like to think that we can just open everything up and let this thing rip through, it isn't the right decision. So many people would die doing that and it wouldnt just be CV19 cases.

Because the hospitals are stressed, elective surgery has been cancelled, administrating meds to very ill people is difficult and they are catching CV19 while in hospital and dying from it.

I am unsure as to why people think CV19 isn't a big deal, or play it down or undermine the severity. Just look at Melbourne, well tested, resourced etc, we know fairly well how many cases we have and the numbers are not all that big, yet we are in trouble in the health services already. If we keep up this 600 plus day stuff for a few more days things are going to start breaking down and the death toll will begin to include people of all ages, not just the over 50s. Younger very sick CV cases do well because of the hospitals, not because the disease isn't all that bad for younger people.

That is my take on this....

https://au.news.yahoo.com/coronavirus-emergency-doctors-plea-as-victoria-cases-soar-020007459.html

5
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: July 07, 2020, 01:22:28 PM »
Asking good questions is well encouraged. It enables shy posters and lurkers to receive answers that otherwise they would have had to guess. Normally such questions should go in the questions thread or in subject-specific threads, but it is sometimes acceptable to post them in this thread as well, depending on context, and tone.
Asking repeat questions, in the main thread, in an adversarial tone, for which the answer has already been given and over which a consensus exists in the community, is ill-mannered and is seen as a way to preach rather than an innocent attempt to find answers.
Phoenix - your 850 hPa vs. surface temps question was an example of the latter.
Asking "Can someone explain what is insane with the forecast?" is perfectly acceptable and within context. I often wonder myself, though thanks to the efforts of knowledgeable posters I have learned some of the basics over the years. Had you stopped with that sentence, all would have been fine. But you didn't and are hereby warned, derailing this thread is not allowed and moderation will be swift. Note: If I had been up when the post was made I would have moved it elsewhere immediately, but it already garnered some responses so I will let it stay.

6
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: June 27, 2020, 03:06:54 PM »
There's several reasons why the number of deaths in US is not yet rising the way the number of infections is:
  • Deaths come with a delay.
  • Some (but certainly not all) of the increase in cases is due to increased testing.
  • Doctors have more experience and know better what treatments work in the critical cases. Besides preventing some deaths, this may also delay death further in other cases.
  • Nursing homes, hospitals etc. are better prepared to protect their vulnerable residents/patients.
  • While the young and healthy are eager to return to normality, the elderly and other risk groups are continuing to self isolate, practice social distancing etc.
  • It's possible that some states are cooking the books. Perhaps not actually forging the records but controlling the way statistics are collected and reported.

7
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: May 09, 2020, 12:21:19 PM »

Is this the Kawasaki stuff that the UK organisation tried to defuse? It seems really important that SARS-CoV-2 is a danger to children, after all, isn't it? Are there any behavioural scientists encouraging this kind of news?

It's a Kawasaki-like Covid-related syndrome.  But hey, it's only a few dozen children.  Their lives aren't so important, are they?  It's way more important to get the GDP back up, because the wealthy really need that GDP.
Yes, because the wealthy are the ones being devastated by mass unemployment, and not the people reliant on paychecks. No, definitely not. GDP is only for the wealthy, poor people live off the land, this hasn't even affected them!

This is completely disingenuous tripe. And it IS only a few dozen children. Oh well. We don't halt the world for car accidents, and that kills thousands of children per year. Life goes on.

But THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!!! Oh noes. And not the 30% of people who are now unemployed, many of whom have children, who will imminently be unable to afford food or shelter as state unemployment funds reach 0.
Would it be possible to stop with this BS discussions. We know some people are scared, we know others aren't. It doesn't make sense to through the arguments from one side of the Internet to the other one.
We are entering in the next step of the Pandemic, maybe with a future 2nd wave (nobody knows, but I see a high probability), and there could have been a 3rd way between lockdown and full open, just look at Taiwan and Korea. I feel that the required measures have not been implemented during lockdown, making a second wave possible, and it makes me sad.
I heard that the reopening doesn't work too well, in Trier (Germany) some shops would have said that it was cheaper to be closed with employees paid by the unemployment fund than it is now to be open. We need to find ways that are acceptable, reasonable and safe so that life can restart more or less normally. The "it's a flu" message of some governments probably harmed economy more than the lockdown because people get the feeling that they have to protect themselves because the government doesn't do it, so people stay home because they think that they will not be protected outside.
Same thing with masks, when to many people don't wear one, I leave the area because I don't feel safe, and many people do like me. The ones who don't wear a mask show to the world that they don't care about others, that they have an egocentric personality. Same thing for the people who wear a mask that only filters the air that comes in.
Honestly, there are shops where I won't go again because I didn't feel safe the last time I was there, If some people feel they are heroes because they go downtown without masks, I'd like to tell them that they are idiots, they might infect some, but they scare  many who will stay home, so they make the restart of the economy more difficult.
Test, trace and protect is the only solution for the economy until we have herd immunity through vaccination or through major suffering.

Social medias are terrible. When works have to be done on the drinking water network, we used to inform the concerned people with an flyer in the mail box. Nowadays, people put these flyers on Facebook, so non concerned people get scared because they don't know if they are concerned, so we have to publish it also on our website.

8
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 13, 2020, 07:19:23 PM »
This chart is very interesting and tells us a lot since Iceland does lots of random testing (already tested close to 10% of the population) while the Dutch test only symptomatic cases.
 
1) most asymptomatic cases are children
2) there are many asymptomatic cases
3) therefore closing schools is very important to stop the spread, much more important than in many other pandemics

(50% of Dutch cases are above 60, while only 15% is above 60 in Iceland which means that at least 1/3 of the infected have no or very mild symptoms, especially children)

See for yourself:

9
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 07, 2020, 09:55:21 PM »
...
ps if no-one feeds the racist trolls perhaps they will go away .. rather them than the likes of Sam ..

+1

Sam provided a lot of great analysis.  I would really like to see his take on the April projections.

10
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 04, 2020, 01:34:21 PM »
Peace is found inside gratefulness.
Difficult, crazy, heartless etc. as it may sound, finding a way to be grateful for this virus, brings peace.

No government and no segment of society (not even on this forum) could envisage trying to address AGW as thoroughly as we now are. Assuming the drastic reduction in most forms of human consumption continues for many months, it will be the biggest action possible to slowing the metrics reflecting AGW (CO2 levels, Artic Ice extent and volume etc., temperature anomalies, etc. etc.). Lag times and the complexity within the causes and effects for each metric may mean we may never even see a measurable effect, but the benefits in this regard are undeniable.

The byproduct of this virus is that at last we are starting to tackle AGW on the scale that it deserves.
Society, when it passes out the other side of this virus, will be different. Now is a great time to envisage how to leverage the changes currently enforced to continue to address AGW with the urgency it deserves, for AGW is surely the biggest risk (many here would agree it's an existential risk).

And so, I find peace amid the unfolding tragedy, hoping we use this gift to tackle AGW (note: I have not yet found a way to be grateful for AGW. If anyone can help with that, I'd be very grateful indeed).

11
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: March 27, 2020, 08:02:47 PM »
Sam,

You're welcome, and glad it was helpful. For those interested, here's the tweet and paper reference for the Wuhan CFR study:

https://twitter.com/AaronRichterman/status/1242815998446755842

Reported CFRs can be biased 1) upwards if underidentifaction of cases 2) downwards if deaths have not yet occurred in setting of ongoing illness. Study below attempts to account for these and estimates 1.4% symptomatic CFR.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0822-7

Quote
Estimating clinical severity of COVID-19 from the transmission dynamics in Wuhan, China, 19 March 2020

Abstract

As of 29 February 2020 there were 79,394 confirmed cases and 2,838 deaths from COVID-19 in mainland China. Of these, 48,557 cases and 2,169 deaths occurred in the epicenter, Wuhan. A key public health priority during the emergence of a novel pathogen is estimating clinical severity, which requires properly adjusting for the case ascertainment rate and the delay between symptoms onset and death. Using public and published information, we estimate that the overall symptomatic case fatality risk (the probability of dying after developing symptoms) of COVID-19 in Wuhan was 1.4% (0.9–2.1%), which is substantially lower than both the corresponding crude or naïve confirmed case fatality risk (2,169/48,557 = 4.5%) and the approximator of deaths/deaths + recoveries (2,169/2,169 + 17,572 = 11%) as of 29 February 2020. Compared to those aged 30–59 years, those aged below 30 and above 59 years were 0.6 (0.3–1.1) and 5.1 (4.2–6.1) times more likely to die after developing symptoms. The risk of symptomatic infection increased with age (for example, at ~4% per year among adults aged 30–60 years).

Here's the HHS/Emory presentation he mentions:

https://twitter.com/AaronRichterman/status/1243550563037597696

slides (no recording yet):

https://unm.us15.list-manage.com/track/click?u=0a75704ef6816d86a64d5a1b1&id=6a52fb676c&e=08da429d75
 
https://unm.us15.list-manage.com/track/click?u=0a75704ef6816d86a64d5a1b1&id=51362a83db&e=08da429d75


"Clinical and team management in the COVID-ICU: Successful strategies from the first week"
COVID-19 Clinical Rounds
Mark Caridi-Scheible, MD
Emory Critical Care Center, Atlanta, GA

12
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: March 25, 2020, 11:13:29 PM »
The United States has apparently decided to try the most egregious solution. Let the maximum number of people die, while also passing legislation to rob the poor and give to the rich.

On the current course, expect in excess of 25 million American dead over the next five weeks, and a wrecked economy.

Spain just overtook China with the most cases. Tomorrow the US will overtake Spain. Within about 10 days, the US will have more than half of all cases globally and all hospitals will be in saturation then or shortly after. Expect the fatality rate to go well over 10% in the US.

The impacts will be very uneven. There is virtually no time left to do meaningful things. Instead, the moron in chief is whimpering at not being able to play with his friends, and trying to go precisely the opposite direction from that which is useful.

The catastrophe in the US won't have been bad luck. America will have been killed through gross incompetence and willful malice by its President, the Congress, many State governors, a Republican political party that is corrupt stupid arrogant and ignorant, Trumps followers who are a cult, and the corrupt media that supports their beliefs. They are committing joint suicide, while injuring and killing millions of their brethren, while never understanding a single thing.

America will be shattered and changed by this experience in wholly unpredictable ways. Welcome to hell.

Sam

13
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: March 21, 2020, 03:15:51 AM »
Just remember, China is still locked down.  We have absolutely no idea what's going on in China right now.  Wuhan is basically a disaster zone, who knows how many bodies they've burned at this point.

China is obviously lying, there's likely millions dead in China.

Best to refrain from this line of thinking unless there is evidence to suggest it is true.
There is enough fear mongering already..... look at Trump crossing out Corona and replacing it with Chinese.
Dont walk that path.

We need to work hard to work together.

14
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: March 21, 2020, 01:54:59 AM »
Over the past 20 days, the growth rate in the confirmed case count in the United States has been steady at 1.323x/day.

That equates to a 2.47 day doubling time, and an R0 of about 8.16.

Several States locked down (somewhat) in the last two days. It takes 5-7 days for symptoms to show. It takes 1-3 days to decide to seek help. It takes 2-4 days to get a test (if you can get one). And it takes 1-2 days to get the results. That is a lead time from infection to counting of about 9-16 days - most likely 12-13 days.

So, we will not see the growth slow down at all for at least 9-10 days, probably a bit more. That may reduce the growth to 1.25x/day for the next week. In 4-5 days as the counts rise we should see a national quarantine.

The blob in office said today he cannot foresee any case that would justify that. Usually when he says something like that he has to reverse himself within 4-5 days, then claim he saw it coming long ago.

So with counts today at 19,302 (provisional - they will go 7.5% higher). Using the above scenario then, we are likely to see: (increase all of these by a factor of 1.075 to account for the undercounting for today.)

3/20   19,032
3/21   25,179
3/22   33,312
3/23   44,072
3/24   58,307
3/25   77,141
3/26  102,057
3/27  135,022
3/28  178,634
3/29  236,332
3/30  312,668
3/31  390,834
4/1    488,543
4/2    610,679
4/3    763,349
4/4    954,186

That puts the likely confirmed count in the US over 1,000,000 on April 4, and over half a million on April Fool's day.

It is pointless to speculate at all beyond this as the count changes over the next week will result in life altering changes in the body politic of the United States. None of these numbers are meaningful. They are a foreboding of what may come based on the inaction or grossly inadequate actions taken to date.

I understand from friends in California that there is wide spread violation of the stay home rule there. When the count exceeds the magic 50k number in about 4 days, there should be major changes in people's thinking. But with a 10 day lag between infection and the confirmed numbers, that is meaningless in its impact for a week and a half. So the 1,000,000 person confirmed infection milestone is probably baked in already sometime between April 1 to April 11.

By then all hospital beds will have long ago been filled and the hospitals will be overrun.

Sam

Post script: In 5-6 days we will pass China in total confirmed infected persons and we won't even slow down as we go screaming past. 

Also, using current numbers - divide the above by about 72 to get an idea of the deaths. Using the Chinese experience, divide by 43 to get the estimatd death count.

15
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: March 15, 2020, 10:27:22 AM »
Our government has released a very helpful video



Warning don't watch this if you don't like bad language.

16
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: March 13, 2020, 01:42:39 AM »
Though I did not vote for any of these clowns (mostly Trump and his ilk, but basically all of our politicians), on behalf of the US I apologize for the circus / clown show our leadership is and has been for the past few decades. So embarrassing and terrifying that they are leading everyone to very dark places. We are collectively such a blind and stupid people (not all of us, but apparently most of us). It's not totally different elsewhere, but we seem to take it to the nth degree.

17
Consequences / Re: Weird Weather and anecdotal stories about climate change
« on: November 13, 2019, 10:05:27 PM »
^^
I've spotted the very camera shy Nessy. Who knew that she'd been hiding in Venice!
Terry

18
Consequences / Re: Hurricane Season 2019
« on: October 30, 2019, 03:16:20 AM »
No, the article seems to answer that quite explicitly.

19
Consequences / Re: World of 2030
« on: May 08, 2019, 07:32:16 PM »


Rich,
Sorry, but you are cherry-picking.  Selectively choosing the highest rate over the past decades does no one any good.  Conversely, someone could choose the last three years, when sea level rise has slowed to 1.5 mm/year, and say that the water is slowing.  Neither describes the situation accurately.

I'm happy to pick up the topic of "cherry picking" and peel back the layer on that claim.

If you look at the chart of sea level rise in the satellite era, you will sea a relatively steady rise in the graph with 3 significant downward spikes in 1998, 2011 and 2016. There are no dramatic upward "spikes."

The downward spikes are associated with El Nino's ('98 and '16) and an unusual precipitation event which transferred massive amounts of water from ocean to land ('11).

As far as I know, there is no theory which supports any exogenous processes causing short-term spikes in global sea level rise. Only the chronic processes of thermal expansion and loss of land ice are material factors in GMSL increase.

If we peer closely at the curve, we see the pause for the 2016 El Nino and the resumption of the 8mm year increase in 2017. Another pause follows and the resumption of the accelerated increase from April to October 2018.

You can jump to the assumption of "cherry picking", but I'll challenge you to offer a cogent theory as to what might be causing a short-term increase in the slope of the curve that wouldn't be sustained.

The signal is there that SLR is accelerating and it's corroborated by all of the reports that Greenland and Antarctica are losing ice at accelerating rates. Will their continue to be periodic downward adjustments for events like El Nino's and other anomalies like the 2011 precipitation event? Absolutely!

What I'm saying is that we've entered a new normal for the chronic processes of thermal expansion and land ice loss which will only increase in pace in the coming decades.

Pages: [1]